> On 1 Aug 2018, at 20:49, Brent Meeker <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: > > > > 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.
I do not understand. Mechanism is simply the idea that our body does not involve magical things, nor actual infinities. > >> 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. Yes, that is why we can test mechanism. But it is irrelevant for defending your point: in the self-duplication, you will feel reconstituted (or not) before you get the time to test for physicalness or arithmeticalness. > >> 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. But anything cannot be an interpretation. You need an interpreter first. Well, there are plenty of interpreters in arithmetic, so that is not a problem for those who believes that 2+2=4, or KSS = S. Bruno > > 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 >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >>>>> <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 >>>> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >>>> <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 >>> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >>> <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 >> <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout >> <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 > <https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <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.
