On 11/28/2012 2:05 PM, John Clark wrote:
> Same with the two slits: QM describes the two different outcomes of the
measurement
Yes QM predicts the photon will hit here or there with a certain probability, but
afterward the measurement produces only one outcome, as can be seen when we develop the
photographic plate and see only one point not two, its a point right there plain as day
with no doubt whatsoever. Your theory predicts "or", it says there will be one and only
one result so all I want to know is what that result is, was the outcome of the
measurement, W or M?
That's crux of the matter, Bruno (and most people on this "Everything" list) think that
the photon hits in many different places, but these events happen in different 'worlds'
per Hugh Everett's interpretation of QM. The point of Bruno's argument is to show how
this kind of QM could be realized by a computation that computes everything computable
(i.e. the Universal Dovetailer). It's called an 'Everything' list because of this
assumption that, in some sense, everything (possible, mathematical, computable,...) happens.
Brent
P.S. I don't share this assumption - I consider it, at best, an interesting
hypothesis.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
