On 13.05.2012 04:38 meekerdb said the following:
On 5/12/2012 4:33 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:

All this is well known. Copenhagen theory, or "unique-universe" theory
are non computationalist dualist theories.

Not all of them, at least not in the sense of dualist you mean. Adrian
Kent has proposed a one-universe theory which doesn't suffer the
ambiguity of the Copenhagen interpretation.

arXiv:0708.3710v3 "Real World Interpretation of Quantum Theory"

It has some problems similar to those of everything theories, namely
showing that a quasi-classical universe is stable against a chaos of
quantum white rabbits.

But as Shimony has shown, the idea that consciousness collapse the
wave leads to many difficulties, like non local hidden variables in
physics, or solipsism in philosophy of mind. Or even just the problem
to say what exactly is the collapse, on which all believers in
collapse differ.

I think it only leads to these problems if you take the wf to be an
objective property of the system. A more instrumentalist interpretation
(c.f. Asher Peres "Quantum Theory:Concepts and Methods) which takes the
wf to be a way of predicting measurement results doesn't suffer these
problems: 'collapse' is just a change in our information.



Could you please comment on

On the reality of the quantum state
Matthew F. Pusey, Jonathan Barrett & Terry Rudolph
Nature Physics, (2012)


What does it imply?


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