On Wednesday, January 27, 2021 at 3:56:50 AM UTC-7 Quentin Anciaux wrote:
> > > Le mer. 27 janv. 2021 à 11:54, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> a > écrit : > >> >> >> On Tuesday, January 12, 2021 at 10:19:59 PM UTC-7 Pierz wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, January 4, 2021 at 12:09:06 PM UTC+11 [email protected] >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sunday, January 3, 2021 at 3:56:51 PM UTC-7 [email protected] >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jan 3, 2021 at 5:21 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> *> The MWI doesn't guarantee that these subsequent measurements, for >>>>>> subsequent horse races say, are occurring in the SAME OTHER worlds as >>>>>> trials progress, to get ensembles in those OTHER worlds. * >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I don't know what you mean by "SAME OTHER worlds", the same as what? >>>>> In one world Alan Grayson remembers having seen the electron go left, in >>>>> another world Alan Grayson remembers having seen the electron go right, >>>>> other than that the two worlds are absolutely identical, so which one was >>>>> the "SAME OTHER world"? >>>>> >>>>> > You seem to avoid the fact that no where does the MWI guarantee >>>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Quantum mechanics is not in the guarantee business, it deals with >>>>> probability. >>>>> >>>>> *> I don't think you understand my point, which isn't complicated. * >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, your point is very simple indeed, but the word simple can have 2 >>>>> meanings, one of them is complementary and the other not so much. >>>>> >>>> >>>> In first trial, the MWI postulates other worlds comes into existence. >>>> Same other worlds in second trial? Same other worlds in third trial, etc? >>>> Where does the MWI assert these other worlds are the SAME other worlds? >>>> Unless it does, you only have ONE measurement in each of these worlds. No >>>> probability exists in these other worlds since no ensemble of measurements >>>> exist in these other world. AG >>>> >>> >>> You grossly misunderstand MWI. There are no "same other" worlds. The >>> worlds that arise at each trial are different in precisely one way and one >>> way only: the eigenvalue recorded for the experiment. The different >>> eigenvalues will then give rise to a "wave of differentiations" as the >>> consequences of that singular difference ramifies, causing the different >>> worlds generated by the original experimental difference to multiply. >>> "World" really means a unique configuration of the universal wave function, >>> so two worlds at different trials can't possibly be the "same world", and >>> yes, there is only one measurement in each. >>> >> >> *If there is only one measurement in each other world -- which has been >> my claim throughout -- how can Born's rule be satisfied in the MWI? AG* >> > > Every world has a past... So if you do n experiments after n trials you > have 2^n number of worlds each having a past of n trials. > *On the second trial and another splitting, what is the assurance that the new other world is the same as that created on the first splitting, so a sequence of measurement history exists? AG* > >> >> >> >>> That is precisely the stipulation of MWI. If we have a quantum >>> experiment with two eigenvalues 1 and 0, and each is equally likely per the >>> Born rule, then the MWI interpretation is that - effectively - two worlds >>> are created. You, the experimenter, end up in both, each version knowing >>> nothing about the other. So, in the "objective world" (the view from >>> outside the whole wave function as it were), no probability is involved. >>> But if you repeat this experiment many times, each version of you will >>> record an apparently random sequence of 1s and 0s. Your best prediction of >>> what happens in the next experiment is that it's a 50/50 toss up between 1 >>> and 0. Objectively there's no randomness, subjectively it appears that way. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> John K Clark See my new list at Extropolis >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> >>>>> >>>> -- >> > 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/d71dbf38-5943-4f9f-9f1a-f7c5ea822c4cn%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/d71dbf38-5943-4f9f-9f1a-f7c5ea822c4cn%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/2038e98e-2690-4a12-9516-43691b1694aan%40googlegroups.com.
