On Sunday, July 4, 2021 at 5:30:08 AM UTC-5 [email protected] wrote: > On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 11:26 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > *> Then do you suppose that the number of branches corresponds to the >> probability?* >> > > With a few caveats, which I spelled out previously, you already know I > do. I said a few days ago: > > "*If Everett is right and every change no matter how small causes the > universe to split, then there must be some changes to my brain that are so > small (one neutron in one neuron moving one Planck length to the left ) > that they cause no change in conscious experience and do not degrade the > memory of being John K Clark yesterday. Therefore there must be an > astronomical number to an astronomical power of John K Clarks all living in > different, very very slightly different, worlds. The number would be HUGE > but it would still be finite, so the number of John K Clarks that see you > flip a fair coin and come up heads 5 times in a row must be twice as large > as the number of times he sees you do it 6 times, but there would still be > a few that see him do it 100 times, maybe 1000 or even more*." > > John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis > <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> > xq22 >
The MWI interpretation has a property that some think is a problem and others may think is a feature. This branching of quantum paths, which is just a local sort of frame dragging along a subset of paths according to the subjective and local perception of observers, occurs in a nonlocal manner. Where does the actual branching occur? I would say this is a feature, but I can imagine this being worked without MWI. The nonlocality of the gravitation field and the locality of QFT means that with spacetime formed by entanglements of quantum states or fields, that locality and nonlocality may be shifted around. Decoherence and the transition of a quantum state or entanglement to a decoherent set may be thought of as a nonlocal process. This may be worked so the objective collapse in GRW is such a shift. This Yggdrasil branching of quantum states, which in a global context does not really occur, is a local process that occurs within a local frame dragging in state space. This in principle happens throughout the entire universe, where this is nonlocal in a spatial sense or any frame of simultaneity. In QFT we have Wightman conditions of commutating field amplitudes on spatial surfaces. There is then an interplay of locality of fields and nonlocality of quantum states or waves. There are deep things to consider here. Whether one works with MWI branching or with objective collapse ideas there are matters to consider of some depth. I would not select how to think about this based on one's objection to this vast branching of quantum states. There are quantum interpretations that are ψ-epistemic, Copenhagen Interpretation, Qubism etc and those that are ψ-ontic such as Many Worlds or Bohm interpretations. I think there is no decision procedure that can ever tell us which of these sets quantum physics sets within. I would then say which ever one of these you work with is a matter of your choice. I suspect there is no way we can ever know for sure which of these is correct, LC -- 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/e70761f0-c14e-47e8-9390-92d3fde4afcen%40googlegroups.com.
