This is one reason I am not a big upholder of any particular quantum interpretation. They all seem to lead to some intellectual cul de sac. The MWI does seem to imply a kind of coordinate dependency, a dependency tied to Hilbert space, that is outside of physical theory in a proper sense. Other interpretations have their problems as well.
LC On Saturday, July 21, 2018 at 6:52:37 PM UTC-5, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 05:42:48AM -0700, Lawrence Crowell wrote: > > > > The world splitting "at once" runs into some funny issues with > relativity. > > Does the world split at one by observer A's frame or B's frame? For that > > matter, it is hard to know how to assign the split in the local frame of > an > > observer. I think in some ways this has a relationship to the illusion > of > > there being a "now" or present moment in time. In fact it may in general > > point to the whole illusion of consciousness itself. QM may in fact > unravel > > much of philosophy not only in our ideas of ontology and epistemology, > but > > with Descarte's assertion of existential certainty with "I think, > therefore > > I am." > > I would think each observer splits the worlds in er own reference > frame. Quite solipsistic, in a way, in the sense of there only being > one real observer per world. This pushes the problem into how the > disparate worlds come to interact - ie how does observer A compare > notes with observer B. We can note that from observer A's perspective, > observer B is a physical process (a human being, a brain, or even just > some words displayed on a computer screen), and thus compatible with > all other physical processes in A's world. Likewise for observer > B. For space-like separated observers, from A's perspective, the > physical process that is B is receipt of communication, more likely > the words displayed on the computer screen in the examples above. This > occurs at subluminal speed. The worlds splitting will be instantaneous > in observer A's reference frame (ditto a completely independent split > in observer B's reference frame). > > This does contrast with the point of view that MWI branching is more > of a physical process that proceeds at subluminal speeds a la David > Deutsch. But is there a problem with that picture? > > > > -- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) > Principal, High Performance Coders > Visiting Senior Research Fellow [email protected] > <javascript:> > Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- 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.
