> Il 27 maggio 2018 alle 6.05 Brent Meeker <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > > > On 5/26/2018 1:37 PM, [email protected] > mailto:[email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 5:08:51 AM UTC, Brent wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/25/2018 9:50 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Right. I was just making the observation that > > > when we don't see advanced EM waves (coming from the future?), it's > > > generally not seen as a big deal and they're ignored. But when > > > decoherence or the MWI implies the creation of full-blown worlds (that we > > > can't observe), there seems to be a large body of opinion that accepts > > > this bizarre result without serious criticism that there's no mechanism > > > or process for creating full-blown worlds. No. I don't believe in such > > > worlds. I tend to think a large segment of professional physicists have > > > gone mad. AG > > > > > > > > > > > Except you've got it backwards. There is > > > > a mechanism and process for creating them FAPP, evolution by the > > > > Schroedinger equation, which is the same process used in predicting > > > > results. But there is no physical mechanism for making them > > > > disappear....there's a mathematical process, i.e. taking the partial > > > > trace which is the same as applying a projection operator (with a > > > > little better justification). > > > > > > > > > > There's a distinction between subspaces that are disjoint and > > inaccessible to each other, and their non existence. Apparently you want to > > make the case that their mutual inaccessibility is equivalent to their non > > existence. > > > > > Operationally, it is. > > Brent > Sometimes the principle of conservation of quantum information (no-cloning, no-deleting) seems to have something to do with MWI - conservation of quantum information and "relative state" formulation both depend on linearity( ?) - in the sense that any other world must be inaccessible (just to conserve quantum information).
s. "In conclusion, we have shown that any theory for which dynamics is linear with respect to stochastic mixing, the no-cloning and no-deleting principles follow from the law of conservation of information, and from whether two copies contain a different amount of information than a single copy. In particular, this result allows us to understand the physical reason for which perfect cloning or deleting are impossible. They are forbidden because they infringe a principle of conservation of information. Classically, two copies and one copy contain the same information. However in the quantum case, these information contents are generically different, putting restrictions on cloning and deleting processes." https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0407038 https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0407038 see also, for entropy issues, https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0306044 > > > > -- > 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] > mailto:[email protected] . > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > mailto:[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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
