On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 12:17:08 PM UTC-6, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 6:00:50 PM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 8:43:35 AM UTC-6, [email protected] >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 9:27:46 AM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, November 26, 2018 at 3:43:14 PM UTC-6, [email protected] >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *I checked the postulates in Feynman's Sums Over Histories (in link >>>>> provided by Phil) and I see nothing related to waves, as expected, and >>>>> thus >>>>> nothing about collapse of anything. I would suppose the same applies to >>>>> Heisenberg's Matrix Mechanics; no waves, no collapse. I suppose you could >>>>> say they just produce correct probabilities, and imply nothing about >>>>> relative states other than their probabilities (which wave mechanics >>>>> does), >>>>> but certainly nothing about consciousness. To summarize: you're right >>>>> that >>>>> they are "no collapse" theories, but IMO they say nothing about >>>>> consciousness. AG* >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> In terms of the path-integral (PI) interpretation [ interesting >>>> lecture: >>>> https://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/videos/path-integral-interpretation-quantum-mechanics >>>> >>>> ], there is in effect no waves or wave function, just paths, or histories, >>>> in the sum-over-histories (SOH) terminology. >>>> >>>> There is still "decoherence" in the SOH (a single history is ultimately >>>> "realized"), but it could be called "selection": a single history is >>>> selected from the total ensemble of multiple and interfering histories. >>>> E.g. a single point on a screen is "hit" by a photon in the double-slit >>>> experiment. >>>> >>> >>> *Does "selection" add any insight to the measurement problem; that is, >>> why do we get what we get? And if not, what is its value? TIA, AG * >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> If you look at it as a "selection of the fittest" (one history surviving >> from an ensemble of histories), then it's like a form of quantum Darwinism. >> The quantum substrate is a cruel world where all histories (but one) die. >> > > That's not an explanation; rather, a vacuous statement of the result. AG > >> >> But that is a criticism of Darwinism (*natural selection*) in general.
*Quantum Darwinism* is a theory claiming to explain the emergence of the classical world <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_physics>from the quantum world <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics> as due to *a process of **Darwinian <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin> natural selection <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection>*; where the many possible quantum states <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_states> are selected against in favor of a stable pointer state <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pointer_state>. [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Darwinism ] - pt -- 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.
