On 9/24/2019 12:36 AM, Philip Thrift wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 8:44:39 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 9/23/2019 6:24 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 3:44:49 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote:
On 9/23/2019 11:59 AM, Philip Thrift wrote:
/But other quantum experts use decoherence to explain
quantum phenomena without invoking multiple universes./
"Without invoking" doesn't mean "denying".
It does if you believe in applying Occam's Razor. AG
True. But I'm still waiting for pt to quote this expert saying he
explains quantum phenomena without MW. He keeps implying it's
Zurek, but I just read Zurek's paper on quantum Darwinism again
and ISTM Zurek is assuming MWI throughout. QD is just his
solution to the basis problem.
Brent
Zurek is not on a book tour, nor does he tweet, but after the rollout
of Carroll's book, one can only conclude:
But he writes papers. "Quantum Theory of the Classical: Quantum Jumps,
Born’s Rule, and Objective Classical Reality via Quantum Darwinism" He
seems ambivalent about multiple worlds, using Everett's relative state,
but saying the branches need not be equally real:
/Existential interpretation of quantum theory assigns “relatively
objective existence” (Zurek, 1998b) – key to effective classicality – to
widely broadcast quantum states. It is obviously consistent with the
relative state interpretation: Redundancy of records disseminated
throughout the environment supplies a natural definition of branches
that are classical in the sense that an observer can find out
macroscopic features of his branch and stay on it, rather than “cut off
the branch he is sitting on” with his measurement.
/Zurek takes an operational view of what is "real" and so many quantum
states are not real, because they cannot be determined. He apparently
thinks that all the branches of MWI cannot be real because there is not
enough information capacity in the universe to determine them all. But
in his examples he is always concerned with the density matrix:
objectively determining what the pointer variables can be and showing
how einselection implies a probability measure/. / So his attitude is
like Omnes...once you have a diagonal density matrix you have a
probabilistic theory and so it predicts probabilities.
So maybe I was wrong about whether Zurek would say there was a branch on
which Neanderthals still existed. He might say there's not enough room
for the universe to carry that information.
Brent
* Many Worlds is religion, not science.*
@philipthrift
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9a02595e-7e5e-4f6d-b4ee-d75fd48d0a33%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/9a02595e-7e5e-4f6d-b4ee-d75fd48d0a33%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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/1932e44c-47a8-8b70-f47d-0f658c0e4aa3%40verizon.net.
