Jason, See my new topic what is a wavefunction for my reply....
Edgar On Friday, December 27, 2013 8:01:04 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]<javascript:> > > wrote: > > Jason, > > To address one of your points wavefunctions never collapse they just > interact via the process of decoherence to produce discrete actual > (measurable/observable) dimensional relationships between particles. > > Decoherence is a well verified mathematical theory with predictable > results, and the above is the reasonable interpretation of what it actually > does. In spite of what some believe, decoherence conclusively falsifies the > very notion of collapse. > > > Thanks Edgar, > > If the wave-function does not collapse then the superposition of states is > preserved. This was the essence of Hugh Everett's theory (which is known > today as many-worlds). > > Jason > > > > > On Friday, December 27, 2013 1:14:01 PM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jason, > > Neither of the first 2 points you make here seem correct to me but you > don't express them clearly enough for me to know why you are saying what > you are saying. > > As to the first point, the present moment is self-evident direct > experience > > > Do you think the present moment is the only point in time to exist, to the > exclusion of all others? If so, please explain how this is self-evident. > > > whereas wave function collapse is an outlandish interpretation of quantum > equations which has no basis at all in direct experience, > > > I agree with this. But then why isn't it also "outlandish" to presume > past moment's in time must cease to exist, just because we are not in them? > It seems to be a needless addition to the theory (just like wave function > collapse), to keep our concept of what is real, limited to that which we > are aware of from our particular vantage point. > > To be clear, the collapse theories say that even though the equations of > quantum mechanics predict multiple outcomes for measurements, they suppose > that those other possibilities simply disappear, because we (from our > vantage point in one branch) did not experience those other vantage points > in other branches. Hence they presume only one is reified, to the exclusion > of all others. This "us-centered" thinking is how I see presentism. It says > that only one point in time is reified, to the exclusion of all others. > > > or in quantum theory = the actual equations. > > > If you believe quantum theory is based entirely on the actual equations > (e.g. the Schrodinger equation), this leads naturally to many-worlds. It is > only by added additional postulates (such as collapse) that you can hope to > restrict quantum mechanics to a single world. All attempts at this which I > have seen seem ad hoc and completely unnecessary. > > > Anyway the theory of decoherence put wave function collapse to rest long > ago > </bl > > ... -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
