On 20 Nov 2014, at 19:48, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/20/2014 8:26 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 20 Nov 2014, at 00:54, meekerdb wrote:
On 11/19/2014 3:40 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
none use Positivism or any other school of philosophy because no
philosophical franchise is of the slightest help in doing what
scientists want to do, figure out how the world works.
I disagree. The collapse axiom, which is still in amost textbook,
and which is used by bad pedagog to avoid hard question, is a
philosophical axiom relying on a religious belief: the belief
that there is only one physical universe, and that we are unique.
Some physicists used it as a rule of thumb, and as a way to not
do philosophy, but of course, that is eventually like a use of
God-gap type of explanation.
It's more than a rule-of-thumb; it's the Born rule.
The collapse is not the Born rule. You can add the Born rule, like
Hartle and Graham, or derive it from the SWE, like Preskill,
Selesnick, Destouches-février, and Gleason, with more or less
implicit use of the FPI (which then must be extended to the full
arithmetical domain).
There is only projections, which correspond to yes-no observable.
The spectral decomposition is all we need, + Gleason, or more
simple treatment.
Gleason says IF the Hilbert ray implies probabilities they must come
from the Born rule. But it doesn't say why they should imply
probabilities.
So it reduces the Born rule to the easy explanation of where the
probabilities come from: the self-differentiation due to the self-
superposition. That is the probabilities comes from the FPI.
Without it, there's no way to connect wave functions to
probabilities and no way to test the theory.
The probabilities comes from the FPI on the terms where the
observers appears in the relevant relative states. It is just the
same first person selection that the one in the WM-duplication
thought experience.
But "first person selection" is the same as collapsing the wave
function for each person. They renormalize it to reflect that it's
either Moscow or Washington.
Yes, exactly. It the same ... for each person. That is why we don't
need to introduce a collapse which contradicts the unitarity.
Bruno
Brent
On the contrary, the collapse introduces a lot of magic non
described by the SWE, like indeterminacy, non-locality,
irreversibility, etc.
Bruno
Brent
--
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/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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 everything-
[email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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/d/optout.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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/d/optout.
