On 11/18/2019 3:23 PM, John Clark wrote:
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 4:14 PM 'Brent Meeker' via
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> If you fire electrons at 2 slits and observe the slits then
each electron takes a real path through one and only one slit
and no interference pattern is produced. If you fire
electrons at 2 slits and do NOT observe the slits then a
interference pattern is produced indicating that each electron
went through both slits. Thus real path quantum theory needs 2
sets of physical laws, one for when things are observed and
one when they are not. Many Worlds only needs one set of
physical laws, and one set is more parsimonious than two.
/> That's what the evangelists for MWI say. /
I think "evangelists" is unfair. Even the most ardent fan doesn't say
we know for certain the MWI is true, they just say it's the least
crazy idea that anybody has so far thought of that explains the crazy
experimental facts, and they readily admit it's possible the problem
is just that nobody has thought hard enough yet. And they certainly
don't say anybody who disagrees with the MWI will be eternally
tortured as the loving Christian God constantly threatens to do to
those who don't believe in Him.
/> But in fact some more stuff is needed to explain why we see the
world as we do, i.e. how probability comes into it/
If the Schrödinger equation really means what it says and everything
that can happen does happen then probability would have to come into
it when answering the question "What will a being that remembers being
Brent Meeke today see tomorrow?".
/> Maybe this more stuff can be derived from Schroedinger's
equation, but even to do so seems to require additional assumptions./
Additional assumptions are needed only if you insist on getting rid of
those other worlds,
No. Not just get rid of additional worlds, even to explain how different
possibilities, which all happen, come to have probabilities (in the
operational frequentist) sense as specified by the Born rule. And also
to explain why we can only measure and see the variables we do, instead
of vector sums of them in Hilbert space, i.e. "the preferred basis problem".
just as you can get a theory that very accurately predicts how the
planets move in the night sky even though the theory has the Earth at
the center and the sun and all the planets moving around it, you just
have to assume lots and lots of epicycles.
Or you compute their motion relative to the mass center and then
transform to Earth-centric (that's the popular method).
But theCopernicus theory won because it was more parsimonious in its
assumptions. Hugh Everett's genius wasn't that he added something new
to Quantum Mechanics, his genius was in getting rid of useless junk.
But did he get rid of it by postulating things just as questionable as
Bohr's insistence that we had to assume a classical world in order to
have objective records and do science.
Brent
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2mdKibDGHmjt%3Dy_No2x6wHP8Q%2Bxcwdvyqy-k1RXnCNaA%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv2mdKibDGHmjt%3Dy_No2x6wHP8Q%2Bxcwdvyqy-k1RXnCNaA%40mail.gmail.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/1b18e3bc-51c7-b200-04cc-3f624c5a0f7c%40verizon.net.
