On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 11:57 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thursday, August 8, 2019, Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 4:50 AM Jason Resch <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> A multitude of classical computational traces can be found in a quantum >>> computation. You point out this multitude of computation traces can be >>> viewed as one state of a larger space. Viewing it this way, however, >>> doesn't eliminate the multitude of the classical computational traces. >>> >> >> But viewing it in terms of "multiple classical computational traces" does >> not prove that there are multiple parallel worlds. You can change the basis >> vectors, or the clustering properties of the components, to any extent that >> you like. That does not change the fact that there is only one overall >> state, in one world, and no parallel worlds anywhere. >> > > Not immediately, the logic to get to many worlds is as follows: > > > 1. There are multiple classical computational traces in the quantum > computer. > The operation might be representable in this way. But that does not mean that this is what actually happens. Description in a different base leads to a different perspective. > 2. If the classical computational traces are computations of conscious > minds, there are multiple conscious minds and points of views. > Consciousness requires decoherent interaction with an environment, and there is no decoherence within the QC. > 3. The quantum computer maintains the superposition of the multiple > computational traces by virtue of being isolated from the environment. > So there cannot be conscious points of view within it. > 4. Our own minds are isolated from the rest of the environment for some > definition of the environment (e.g. a sphere with a 200 light year radius > centered on Earth). > The immediate environment even within our own skulls is sufficient to decohere anything quantum. > 5. From the perspective of a scientist outside this sphere, we can be > viewed as a superposition of many possible states. > There is no such perspective, because if he is outside the future light cone he can get no information about the state at the centre. If he interacts with it, he decoheres it and it is just another "relative state" (single world). 6. Hence we experience "many worlds" in the sense that the wave function > for the state of the earth becomes a superposition of huge number of > possibilities. (From the POV) of the scientist outside the sphere. > There is no such perspective. Even if there were, the "outside" observer would not see a superposition, because there are no internal multiple worlds -- there is only the one world with one result from the quantum computation. This is just the "Wigner's friend" argument. And that has been shown many times not to imply many worlds, or coherent superpositions of decohered objects. Bruce -- 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/CAFxXSLSXXYBigYub3oJ4j5NAB%2BmMVWvEYKi-ozUVTXVyqSJxjQ%40mail.gmail.com.
