On 04 Dec 2017, at 04:34, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 02:11:11PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 3/12/2017 9:03 am, Russell Standish wrote:
The point being that the uncertainty in the coin's initial
position is
itself due to the amplification of quantum uncertainty by classical
chaos.
That may happen in some cases, but just looking at the numbers says
that
normal thermal motions will far outweigh the effect of any residual
quantum
uncertainty. In most cases where the Lyanpunov exponents lead to
classical
chaos, there is more than enough classical thermal uncertainty in the
initial conditions so that any residual quantum uncertainty is
irrelevant.
But surely, classical thermal uncertainty is just due to amplification
of quantum uncertainty by means of molecular chaos.
Indeed. Bruce seems to introduce a continuous collapse in the picture.
That classical thermal uncertainty can only augment the number of
terms of the superposition. It amplifies the chance of getting a
superposition of the outcomes.
Bruno
If the uncertainty in initial conditions is reduced by measurement
to
something like exp(-λt)w, where w is the coin's thickness, λ the
system's maximal lyapunov exponent and t the time of flight, then
the
coin can be treated deterministically, with the outcome of the toss
known once initial conditions specified to that level of accuracy.
But in the general case, the initial conditions are not so precisely
known. With MWI, an observer is in a superposition of many different
(albeit decohered) quantum universes, and no God can point to one of
them and say that is the real world. So the outcome of the coin toss
can be traced back to the effect of quantum fluctuations during the
setup of the experiment.
That is the contention, but it is fanciful. Quantum uncertainties
only lead
to distinct, non-interacting, worlds if the initial quantum effect is
amplified in such a way that decoherence can lead to the (effective)
diagonalization of the density matrix. That does not happen for
just any
quantum interaction. So even if the coin tosser is split into
disjoint
worlds by someone doing a quantum optics experiment in the next
room, that
is completely irrelevant. One cannot ascribe the uncertainty in the
outcome
of the coin toss to the quantum experiment next door -- the
uncertainty in
the toss outcome is solely due to the lack of sufficiently detailed
knowledge of the initial conditions. And that uncertainty is purely
classical in origin. The fact that there might be many different coin
tossers in different worlds does not affect the random influences
on the
coin toss in a particular world. And we are concerned only with the
particular world which we happen to inhabit -- the others are
disjoint and,
by definition, irrelevant.
If quantum uncertainties were to add up in the way you suggest, it
would
seem that thermal randomness, being much larger, would also add up
in such a
way that nothing would ever be predictable. But we know that the
world is,
by and large, classical and predictable, so quantum uncertainties
must tend
to cancel out in the way that thermal uncertainties do. Brownian
motion is
an essentially classical phenomenon, and it is important only for
microscopic objects. Brownian effects cancel out in the large.
There is additional (observer inherent) coarse-graining, which means
we can make useful predictions on average of the behaviour of
macroscopic thermodynamic variables.
But it tends to fail for variables that aren't coarse grained (eg the
state of a tossed coin after it lands), as these states are finely
distributed throughout phase space.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders
Visiting Senior Research Fellow [email protected]
Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
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 https://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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
