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 refuted, and "spiritual interpretations", like von Neumann's are the vagues of the lot## Advertising

`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.`

Brent -- 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.