On 8/1/2018 4:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 31 Jul 2018, at 22:02, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 7/31/2018 9:58 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 31 Jul 2018, at 02:57, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net
<mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:
On 7/30/2018 4:11 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 4:27 PM, Brent Meeker
<meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>>wrote:
>>
Many, perhaps most, physicists do exactly that because
they believe in the "Shut Up And Calculate" quantum
interpretation and are only interested in predicting how
far to the right a indicator needle on a meter moves in a
particular experiment. But for some of us that feels
unsatisfying and would like to have a deeper understanding
about what's going on at the quantum level and wonder
why there is nothing in the mathematics that says anything
about a wave collapsing.
/
>
That's not true. "The mathematics" originally included the
Born rule as part of the axiomatic structure of QM. /
A axiom is supposed to be simple and self evidently true, the
Born rule is neither; and it wasn't derived from first principles
?? You think matix mechanics was "derived from first
principles"?? What "first principles"? Have you gone platonic on us?
it was picked for reasons that were were empirical and practical,
for some strange reason the damn thing works.
Well, maybe it works because the Born rule is the only consistent
way to put a probability measure on Hilbert space. Born just
inuitited the rule (and actually got it wrong and corrected it in a
footnote); but Gleason proved it in 1957. So the Born rule comes a
lot closer to being "derived from first principles" than does
Schroedinger's equation or matrix mechanics.
Yes. But we can suspect that Everett needs a form of mechanism, and
with Church thesis, along with “yes doctor” that makes mandatory to
derive matrix mechanics from first principle, like the FPI perhaps,
and certainly something like at least one universal machinery, like
elementary arithmetic or the combinators.
The catch is that Born had assume a probability interpretation;
which nobody liked at the time because they could only think of
probability as ignorance about ensembles and there were no
ensembles...until Dewitt.
I like very much Dewitt, but Dewitt is the one who better understood
Everett (after mocking him if I remember well).
I was referring to the fact that it was Dewitt who invented the
mulitple-world interpretation. Everett called it "the relative
state" interpretation, and didn't consider multiple worlds.
Everett was asked by its publisher to not use the expression “parallel
universes”, "many-worlds”, and said, according to some biographer,
that he regretted this. Personally I prefer “relative sate”, but all
this just allude to one and the same theory: QM-without-collapse.
Also, the square of the absolute value of the complex wave
produces a probability which collapses into a certainty when a
observation is made, but the mathematics can't say when that
happens because it doesn't say what a observation is.
Mathematics never includes the interpretation that allows you to
apply it.
That is wrong. Indeed Gödel’s incompleteness is already a case where
mathematics includes interpretations of mathematical theories (set
of beliefs).
Interpreting arithmetical equations as sets of beliefs is already
interpretation.
With mechanism, that is the same as your consciousness:
"With mechanism" all things follow since you just made up the term.
it is an interpretation of the set of arithmetical semi-computable
relations implemented by your brain relatively to computations in
arithmetic. Adding a universe or a god, other than arithmetic or
combinators cannot work, as a universal machine cannot distinguish a
physical and an arithmetical reality (except experimentally).
A notable exception.
You could say that intepretating schroedinger equation as a
propagating wave is already an interpretation. In that sense, anything
(except consciousness) is an interpretation.
Exactly.
Brent
That is what universal machine do: interpreting. I will click on some
button, and my computer will interpret it as an invitation to send
this mail.
Bruno
Brent
Like Everett embeds the physicists in physics, mathematical logic
embeds the mathematician in mathematics, and if mechanism is
correct, there is not much choice left in the matter.
Bruno
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to
everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to
everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
<mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>.
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
