On Jul 11, 2005, at 3:56 PM, Dan Minette wrote:
From: "Warren Ockrassa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Jul 11, 2005, at 8:34 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
The Cardinal draws the line in the wrong place....so I'm not
defending
his
editorial. I'm just pointing out that his error is not the typical
creationist error.
Indeed not. Both MWM and multiverse seem pretty hard to swallow; what
do you think of Bohm's interpretation? It seems pretty parsimonious
and
doesn't try to invalidate Bell.
I don't see it as quite as parsimonious as you do. One of the reasons
for
this is that it requires real backwards in time signals to exist.
My understanding was that other models, such as the "probability wave"
versions, required similar nonlocality. Not so much FTL information
transfer as the kind of entanglement that Bell seemed to think happens,
and which (as I understand) does seem to happen, except it's not two
particles entangled; it's the one particle/wave entity that has an
effect everywhere.
My understanding of Bohm's idea is that particles possess both
particulate *and* wavelike qualities, the wavelike properties being
something along the lines of a probability wave, but not of the type
that is supposed to just collapse when a particle seems to be (for
instance) definitely *here* and not *there*. Is that not what Bohm was
suggesting?
As far as I can see, professional physicists are mostly in the "shut
up
and calculate" camp. Those that are not tend to favor MWI or
Copenhagen.
The unseen but very real "backwards in time signals" are rather
troubling
because they seem to involve hidden violations of laws of physics that
we
never see violated.
I don't see how the multi-world or multiverse model is more
conservative than Bohm's idea, though. It sounds considerably more
complex and requires a hell of a lot more effort to make it happen. An
entire universe at each decision node? For every possible decision
ever? This seems more pragmatic than suggesting a particle/probability
wave mix?
Of course I don't have the background in QM to judge, but I do have an
idea about concepts like simplicity, elegance and so on, and the
multiverse model is certainly not any of those things.
--
Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books
http://books.nightwares.com/
Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror"
http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
