On 5/19/2018 8:19 PM, [email protected] wrote:


On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 3:59:03 PM UTC, Brent wrote:



    On 5/18/2018 10:53 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote:


    On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 5:29:33 AM UTC, Brent wrote:



        On 5/18/2018 10:14 PM, [email protected] wrote:

        *So why don't you draw the obvious inference? If those other
        worlds don't exist -- which if I can read English has been
        your passionate position all along -- then quantum
        measurements in this world, the only world, are statistical
        and hence NOT reversible in principle. AG*

            but it is different in each branch of the wave function,
            so reversing this branch does nothing for the others,
            and does not restore the original superposition. Thus
            the process is irreversible in principle (nomologically
            irreversible -- to reverse violates the laws of physics).


        *But if those other worlds don't exist, it makes no sense
        whatever to rely on them to establish irreversible in
        principle in this world (as distinguished from statistically
        irreversible or irreversible FAPP). It seems you want to
        have it both ways; that many worlds really don't exist. but
        quantum measurements in this world are irreversible in
        principle due the existence of many worlds. AG*

        You don't handle uncertainty well, do you.

        Brent


    You know, it's not a perfect analogy, but I don't believe that
    when I pull the one arm bandit with 64 million possible outcomes,
    that 64 million (minus one) worlds are created, each with an
    identical copy of me, getting those other outcomes. What do you
    believe? AG

    I believe I'll wait for a better theory.  One that includes
    gravity and spacetime and consciousness.

    Brent


I see. But you seem too ready to defend the MWI when it appears to imply irreversible in principle. Or do you accept Bruce's claim that the projection operator implies irreversible in principle? AG

Either of them implies irreversiblity.  Whether it is "in principle" depends on what principle you invoke, mathematics, practice, ...? MWI puts information in orthogonal subspaces where we exist in copies such that each copy can act only in one subspace and hence cannot put together the information from other subspaces.  A projection operator is just a mathematical model of this confinement to one subspace.

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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to