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 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
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at