On 3/6/2011 7:16 AM, 1Z wrote:
It is. In the collapse theory, it has to be the collapser (the other
>  theories are too vague, or refuted).
Not at all. Objective collapse theories such as GRW have not been
and "spiritual interpretations", like von Neumann's are the vagues of
the lot

The most conservative interpretation of QM, closest to Bohr, is that the equations of QM are merely description of what we know about particular systems. The equations make stochastic predictions. When we do the experiment, one result of those predicted is realized with the appropriate frequency of occurence. The only "collapse" is actualization of one of the possibilities in our description. Decoherence theory is a way of modeling when we can expect the actualization to be complete. This has a technical difficulty since the unitary evolution implies that decoherence is never complete but only approached asymptotically. However, recent theories of holographic information imply that only finite information can be contained within an event horizon. This would in turn imply there must be a smallest non-zero probability and decoherence actually drives cross-terms in the density matrix to zero. The problem of basis and einselection still remains.


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 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to