On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 9:12:04 PM UTC-6, stathisp wrote: > > > > On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 12:26, Alan Grayson <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> >> >> On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 11:01:54 AM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 7:45:22 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 4:20:46 AM UTC-5, Philip Thrift >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 at 11:45:41 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.wired.com/story/sean-carroll-thinks-we-all-exist-on-multiple-worlds/ >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Many Worlds is where people go to escape from one world of >>>>> quantum-stochastic processes. They are like vampires, but instead of >>>>> running away from sunbeams, are running away from probabilities. >>>>> >>>>> @philipthrift >>>>> >>>> >>>> This assessment is not entirely fair. Carroll and Sebens have a paper >>>> on how supposedly the Born rule can be derived from MWI I have yet to >>>> read >>>> their paper, but given the newsiness of this I might get to it. One >>>> advantage that MWI does have is that it splits the world as a sort of >>>> quantum frame dragging that is nonlocal. This nonlocal property might be >>>> useful for working with quantum gravity, >>>> >>>> I worked a proof of a theorem, which may not be complete unfortunately, >>>> where the two sets of quantum interpretations that are ψ-epistemic and >>>> those that are ψ-ontological are not decidable. There is no decision >>>> procedure which can prove QM holds either way. The proof is set with >>>> nonlocal hidden variables over the projective rays of the state space. In >>>> effect there is an uncertainty in whether the hidden variables localize >>>> extant quantities, say with ψ-ontology, or whether this localization >>>> is the generation of information in a local context from quantum >>>> nonlocality that is not extant, such as with ψ-epistemology. Quantum >>>> interprertations are then auxiliary physical axioms or postulates. MWI and >>>> within the framework of what Carrol and Sebens has done this is a >>>> ψ-ontology, >>>> and this defines the Born rule. If I am right the degree of ψ-epistemontic >>>> nature is mixed. So the intriguing question we can address is the nature >>>> of >>>> the Born rule and its tie into the auxiliary postulates of quantum >>>> interpretations. Can a similar demonstration be made for the Born rule >>>> within QuBism, which is what might be called the dialectic opposite of MWI? >>>> >>>> To take MWI as something literal, as opposed to maybe a working system >>>> to understand QM foundations, is maybe taking things too far. However, it >>>> is a part of some open questions concerning the fundamentals of QM. If >>>> MWI, and more generally postulates of quantum interpretations, are >>>> connected to the Born rule it makes for some interesting things to think >>>> about. >>>> >>>> LC >>>> >>> >>> If you read the link, it's pretty obvious that Carroll believes the many >>> worlds of the MWI, literally exist. AG >>> >> >> Carroll also believes that IF the universe is infinite, then there must >> exist exact copies of universes and ourselves. This is frequently claimed >> by the MWI true believers, but never, AFAICT, proven, or even plausibly >> argued. What's the argument for such a claim? >> > > Given a sufficient number of trials, the probability that an event that > can occur will occur approaches one. > > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou >
For countable trials, it might arbitrarily approach, but never reach unity. But what if the possible number of trials are uncountable? AG > > > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> > Virus-free. > www.avast.com > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> > > <#CAH=2ypXdYZWsDXvoifCV758zw=EA0iLXJU-1PYyeVay03_LdSA@mail.gmail.com_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > -- 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/28e2b03e-baec-4515-a844-2fdb97672156%40googlegroups.com.
