On 4/27/2010 5:23 AM, ronaldheld wrote:
comments on this paper: http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1004/1004.0148v1.pdf

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.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to