On 21-06-2018 23:46, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 6/21/2018 6:33 AM, smitra wrote:
On 21-06-2018 05:01, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 6/20/2018 6:30 PM, smitra wrote:
On 19-06-2018 23:22, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 6/18/2018 6:03 PM, smitra wrote:
On 17-06-2018 22:42, Jason Resch wrote:
Hi Lawrence,
Is the evolution of states of the wave function computable? If so
then
the result of MRDP implies it is Diophantine.
Jason
Or you could try to see if QM could be a meta-theory that arises
when you try to give a statistical description of the set of all
these Diophantine sets. I tried to do something similar with the
set of algorithms a few years ago, getting a half-baked result,
some hints at how quantum field theory could arise from this.
You want to compute the probability that an observer that's
encoded by some mathematical structure has some given information
content. So, if you observe the outcome of an experiment, that's
information in your brain.
Which is the QBism interpretation of QM. If you take the view that
QM
is about predicting and explaining what one will see, there's no
point
in going further...the rest is metaphysics.
Brent
QM should then emerge as an effective theory and the correct
interpretation should also follow.
?? QBism is an interpretation.
Brent
If we derive QM from a more fundamental principle then that is likely
to single out one particular interpretation of QM as the correct one.
So, which interpretation is correct is then no longer a philosophical
or metaphysical question, it's something that can be probed
experimentally by testing the underlying theory from which QM is
derived.
So you're considering finding a more fundamental theory such that QM
will be a consequence or effective theory. Of course that may
involve questions of interpretation of the more fundamental theory.
Brent
Yes, and there are good reasons to believe that even if the MWI is the
correct interpretation that it is unlikely to be the last word. There is
a problem with deriving the Born rule, also simply interpreting the
meaning of probability from within the MWI is problematic. Also, if
another sort of a multiverse exists besides the quantum multiverse, then
in any physics experiment you're going to measure the totality of all
the effects of all multiverses in which you have exact copies. The
effects of these other multiverses e.g. as provided by inflation theory
cannot necessarily be dismissed as trivial (e.g. by saying that it leads
to uncertainty of the quantum state, the effects of which can be
absorbed in a density matrix), as counting states with the restriction
that the same observer is present per my argument in the previous
posting, also leads to quantum-like laws.
Saibal
--
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.
