On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 14:52, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On 9/12/2019 8:11 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2019 at 12:26, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> 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.
>
>
> That assumes identical trials.  A countably infinite set of universes
> could all be different.
>

Yes, but consider an infinite universe where the cosmological principle
applies, which does not seem an unreasonable assumption.

>
> --
Stathis Papaioannou

-- 
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/CAH%3D2ypWROSgAh6p-Sx0fOtwqvUUQkE8%3DogVB2tatUnZmo7_xng%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to