On 4/27/2010 5:23 AM, ronaldheld wrote:
comments on this paper: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.0148v1.pdf Ronald
Unitary evolution has always implied that there is some basis in which there is no decoherence. Recovery of a classical world must depend on (approximate) einselection of special "pointer" states. So I don't think there is a transformation that gives eqn (2) unless the system consists of time-like separate regions for the whole duration considered - in which case they are already two physically separate "worlds" that have just been represented together mathematically. I think decoherence depends on the *approximate*, but not strict, separability of the interaction.
Brent -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
