On 16 October 2013 16:01, Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Our theory in a certain sense bridges the positions of Einstein and Bohr,
> since the complete theory is quite objective and deterministic...and yet on
> the subjective level...it is probabilistic in the *strong sense* that
> there is no way for observers to make any predictions better than the
> limitations imposed by the uncertainty principle."
> So he explicitly says the fully deterministic theory (fully deterministic
> from the God's eye, third person view) leads to probabilistic
> (random/unpredictable) outcomes from the subjective observer's first person
> view. Even an observer who had complete knowledge of the deterministic
> wave function and could predict its entire evolution could not predict
> their next experience.
> Technically they can. They can correctly predict that they will have *all*the
> available experiences. It's only after the measurement has been made
that there is an *appearance* of probability, with each duplicate feeling
that he has experienced a probablistic event. But that feeling only arises
from the assumption (or gut feeling) that there is only one observer, both
before and after the measurement.
(However, I imagine everyone here understands this...???)
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.