On 5/20/2018 3:35 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
Exactly. The quantum Bayesian take this viewHow does "Baysian" fit into this picture? Can't one interpret the SWE as a representation of what we know about a system, without being a Baysian? AGand consider Schroedinger's equation also as a personal book keeping device of what one knows about a system and then the Born rule and projection operators fit neatly into the scheme of updating one's personal knowledge.I would delete "personal" from your comment. We're referring to the knowledge of any observer. AG
No. That's whole point of it being Bayesian. The SWE is conceived as relative to one's personal information. So if you know the electron was prepared in UP polarization and I don't, we will write down different states and when it goes through an SG measuring UP, you won't change your representation, but I will. If you start to regard it as "objective" and "real" you fall back in to the problems that led to MWI.
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.
