On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 7:18 AM Lawrence Crowell < [email protected]> wrote:
*> MWI is a quantum interpretation because it makes an ontological > statement on the nature of the wave function. Quantum mechanics by itself > makes no inference on the existential nature of ψ.* The square of the absolute value of nothing is nothing but Quantum Mechanics states that the square of the absolute value of the wave function is a probability and that's something, so it seems to me Quantum Mechanics is saying the wave function is consistent with reality, it exists. *> The MWI is ψ-ontological, which means it requires the wave function to > be ontic or real. By way of contrast the Bohr interpretation is > ψ-epistemic, which is to say the ψ is just an epistemological entity used > to compute experimental outcomes; it has no reality.* Bohr assumes the wave function collapses, MWI does not make that assumption. Bohr needs to explain how consciousness works as conscious observers have the ability to collapse the wave function, but MWI can ignore consciousness because it has nothing to do with it, MWI says conscious things obey the same laws of physics as things that are not conscious. Bohr needs to explain exactly what a "observation" is but all MWI needs to say is when something changes the universe splits. MWI maintains that the Schrodinger equation means exactly what it says, Bohr insists on putting in a lot of caveats. MWI is cheap on assumptions but expensive in universes, Bohr is the opposite, take your pick. John K Clark -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv38MhaTR%3DHuqsL38QMBYmYX8t_OkgNgkMs-yW7jByN5dw%40mail.gmail.com.
