> On 7 Aug 2018, at 22:25, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 8/7/2018 4:32 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 7 Aug 2018, at 01:33, Brent Meeker <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 8/5/2018 9:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 4 Aug 2018, at 23:32, [email protected] >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> AFAIK, no one has ever observed a probability wave, from which I conclude >>>>> the wave function has only epistemic content. >>>> >>>> >>>> Then you need to explain how that epistemic content interfere in nature. >>> ?? The epistemic content IS how interference occurs in nature. The wave >>> function is one's estimation/knowledge of how events will infold, including >>> intereference. >> >> That will follow from mechanism indeed, but is not the standard way most >> people interpret the physical laws. The *physical* antic will indeed be >> epistemic, but that is what we need to test (and indeed the quantum confirms >> this, but you give the answer before the question). What I meant is that the >> quantum wave has to be taken as real, as we can put it in a box and send it >> to a colleague to ask if he get the same results. > > The epistemic view is that he will get the same result only if he has the > same information, which is represented in his calculation of the wave > function.
OK if the result is some distribution of probability, or a statement like the particle will never get this position (P = 0). Typically same wave does not entail same individual results. > That's the idea of QBism. The probabilistic nature of QM allows that persons > with different information can still get a result consistent with both wf. > It is different from the early ideas of consciousness collapses the wf in > that it supposes a wf is relative to a person and so its collapse is also > relative to a particular person observing a result. OK. So QBism is mechanist-friendly. > > I would think this interpretation would be close to your ideas in that it > keeps a close link between individual consciousness and QM, i.e. there is a > relative state even before observation. OK. 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 [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 > <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 [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.
