On Tuesday, November 27, 2018 at 6:49:51 PM UTC, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > 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. >
*Ridiculous comparison IMO. Darwinism posits a changing environment and competition among species for niches. Nothing comparable in Quantum Darwinism other than all outcomes fail except for one which succeeds in each single trial, which we knew from the get-go. AG* > > *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.
