On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 10:45 AM John Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2022 at 6:06 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> the key is understanding what "the collapse of the wave function" >>> means physically. Many Worlds says everything that is not forbidden is >>> mandatory so everything Schrodinger's wave equation does not rule out >>> does physically happen, so "collapse" just means that different solutions >>> to Schrodinger's equation are ... well... different. And the great virtue >>> of tautologies is that they're always true. Richard Feynman said all the >>> weirdness in quantum mechanics can be found in the 2 slit experiment, so I >>> will use that to illustrate the point. This is how I think Many Worlds >>> would describe the two-slit experiment and several variations of it. >>> >> >> *> I take the fact that you have changed the subject to a many worlds >> account of the two-slit experiment as clear evidence that you do not have a >> local many worlds account of the question at issue, namely, a local account >> of Bell-type correlations.* >> > > Just exchange the 2 slits in the experiments that I described with a > polarizer and then the world would split because of polarization > differences not because of which slip the photon went through, or if you > prefer exchange the photons with electrons and the 2 slits with a > Stern-Gerlach magnet, and then the world will split because of differences > in spin of the electron; after that everything I said was still hold true, > and nowhere would there be a need to invoke non-local influences. And you > can build any Bell-type experiment you like with polarization or with spin, > Yes. But you have to show how non-separable states can exhibit locality. Or, at least, you are required to show in detail how the correlation arise locally, in many worlds, or in any other theory. > > *> Saibal's account below is every bit as non-local as the original >> quantum account.* >> > > I don't know what you mean by "the original quantum account" but > Superdeterminism > is the only way to have determinism, locality, and reality, nothing else > can give you all three. Superdeterminism is also very very dumb, it's so > dumb I find it astonishing that anybody takes it seriously when it has the > same intellectual gravitas as geocentrism, > > *> You equivocate on the word "world".* >> > > I did? I thought I was being clear, for these purposes the words "world" > and "universe" are interchangeable and have exactly the same meaning they > have when used in any other context. I meant nothing new or exotic in the > words. > Worlds are disjoint and do not interact. Your wave function components are not disjoint until decoherence makes them non-interacting. > *> What you are really talking about here are just components of a >> superposed wave function.* >> > > The word "just" in the above is not powerful enough to destroy the Many > World's > idea, you're gonna have to do one hell of a lot better than that. > I am not trying to demolish many worlds. I am just pointing out that it is no more a local theory than is any collapse theory. Bruce -- 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/CAFxXSLTUJUuR5zwJcVKukgiDpU6kpO%3D9GbHo-10ZykgpFv0UFg%40mail.gmail.com.
