On Thursday, May 3, 2018 at 4:12:31 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 2 May 2018, at 10:53, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 3:36:31 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 29 Apr 2018, at 08:21, 'scerir' via Everything List < > [email protected]> wrote: > > IMO Schroedinger invented this manyworlds or manyminds or manywords > interpretation. > > > The quote below seems to indicate that this is not the case, unless you > agree (with me, and Deutsch, …) that QM *is* the discovery of the many > superposed worlds/states/minds, and that the founder added the collapse > postulate ONLY to avoid the proliferation of the alternate > worlds/states/minds. Everett is just the guy who realise that the MW does > not leads to a jelly quagmire of everything, by taking the first person > view (what he called subjective) of the observers, as their memories get as > much quasi orthogonal that the results they could have attributed to a > collapse. The collapse, and the irreversibility is purely “subjective” > (first person) and irreversible in principle for *us*. To reverse the > entire universal wave, we would need to go outside the physical universe in > some practical way, which, needless to say, is rather difficult. > > But I do agree with you, Schroedinger and Einstein understood that the > collapse was a problem for the rest of physics and philosophy. They were > rightly skeptical that Bohr and Heisenberg got the whole thing. Would have > they like Everett? Bohr just threw Everett out of his home, I have read > somewhere. I think Einstein would have prefer it to anything involving an > action at a distance, like Bohm’s theory (non local hidden variable > theory). Indeed, as you all know, Einstein told that he would have prefered > to be a plumber than be involved in a theory with some action-at-a distance. > > Bruno > > > Relativity affirms action at a distance. > > > ? > > Relativity is born with Einstein trying, and succeeding, to eliminate the > action at a distance in Newton’s theory of gravitation, and in Maxwell ’s > theory of electromagnetism. >
*Wrong. Completely wrong. Ever hear of the light cone in relativity? Light-like events are causally connected, which MEANS action at a distance, whereas space-like events are not. Relativity, and E&M after being modified by Einstein, affirm action at a distance. Newton's gravity theory has instantaneous action at a distance. It was modified in the form of GR, which allows for action at a distance at the speed of light. Classical E&M allowed for fields and actions to propagate at the SoL, but not instantaneously. You speculate authoritatively on the nature of the Cosmos but have little to no knowledge of basic physics. AG * > > Einstein found physical indeterminacy, and physical action at a distance > making no sense at all. But with the MW theory, neither the indeterminacy, > nor the “action-at-distance” are physical. They are only local appearances. > (Like we expect with digital mechanism). > > My sense is that Einstein would have found the MWI "repellent" (to quote > Weinberg). > > > Plausiby. But I guess Einstein would have found the MW far less > conceptually repellent than physical action at a distance. > > He would have found it excessively ornate, > > Or excessively elegant. Somehow, Everett is to Copenhagen what General > relativity is to special direction, albeit in epistemological direction. > > Everett is just the preceding theory (Copenhagen , that > Schroedinger/Dirac/etc. equation + collapse (and a strange dualist > theory)), where Everett is just taking Schroedinger equation seriously. > > And then Everett confirmed the consequence of an even simpler theory, > which is actually a theorem already of Peano Arithmetic. The theory that > there is a universal machine. Now it is a theorem that all universal > machine dreams that they are all universal machine, and they define a > “consciousness flux” which differentiate into consistent, sound and > unsound, theories and experiments, and first person experience, justifying, > testable, the core of all geographical histories, the physical laws. > > Why add a collapse axiom? To satisfy the ego to be unique? The > “many-world” is only the wave equation, or the Heisenberg matrices, with an > internal relative states interpretation, which requires only the Gleason > measure. > > or to quote Nietzsche when discussing Christianity, "rococo". AG > > > > Which Christianity? Hypatia, who taught Plotinus Neoplatonism and > Diophantus' Mathematics in Alexandria was confronted, at about +400, with > two types of Christians. The educated one, knowing about Plato and > discussing theology, and well versed in mathematics (which was a > prerequisite in theology) and then a growing number of literalist radicals. > Yet the emperor Constantin, who will convert to christianism is still an > open minded christian, tempering the authoritarian *blasphemy*. It will > take Justinian to call “pagan” or “heretic” (I think) the non confessional > theologian, basically forbidding theology to science, and science to > theology, enforcing their separation. It is normal that the most > fundamental science get stolen by authoritarian powers (by definition: the > original question was not much more than is mathematics or physics or > something else where we must search the first principles?). > Enlightenment will be transformed when theology is back at the faculty of > science (as a domain of reason, even if it surfs at the limit of Reason, > and explore the surrational in between the provable and the false (the true > but not provable about us). > > The God/Non-God debate hides the original more interesting question; > Physical Universe or (Universal) Number Prestidigitation? > > If you believe that a Physical Universe can alter the destiny of the > arithmetic soul, you will have to explain how. > > Everett or mechanism follow the conceptual Occam rule: in the fundamental > matter, don’t add axioms just to make your wish true. Especially if they > lead to insuperable problems of interpretation. > > Bruno > > > > > > > Il 28 aprile 2018 alle 23.01 [email protected] ha scritto: > > > > On Saturday, April 28, 2018 at 5:55:16 AM UTC, scerir wrote: > > > > I think Schroedinger and his cat bear some responsibility. In trying to > debunk Born's probabilistic interpretation he appealed to the absurdity of > observation changing the physical state...even though no one had actually > proposed that. > > Brent > > > “The idea that the alternate measurement outcomes be not alternatives but > *all > *really happening simultaneously seems lunatic to the quantum theorist, > just *impossible. *He thinks that if the laws of nature took *this *form > for, let me say, a quarter of an hour, we should find our surroundings > rapidly turning into a quagmire, a sort of a featureless jelly or plasma, > all contours becoming blurred, we ourselves probably becoming jelly fish. > It is strange that he should believe this. For I understand he grants that > unobserved nature does behave this way – namely according to the wave > equation. . . . according to the quantum theorist, nature is prevented from > rapid jellification only by our perceiving or observing it.” > > -Erwin Schroedinger, *The Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Dublin > Seminars (1949-1955) and Other Unpublished Assays *(Ox Bow Press, > Woodbridge, Connecticut, 1995). > > > Who is Schrodinger referring to? This was written before 1957, when > Everett published his MWI.? Were other theorists advancing the idea that > all alternatives are physically manifested in reality? AG > > > -- > 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. > > > -- > 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 > > ... -- 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.
