Le dim. 23 févr. 2025, 01:39, Brent Meeker <meekerbr...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> > > On 2/22/2025 3:09 PM, Quentin Anciaux wrote: > > Bruce, > > Your argument assumes that because the Born rule is not yet fully derived > from unitary evolution, MWI must be incorrect. > > No, but it's only correct if you add the Born rule to it. But that sort > of makes MWI, "Just the Schroedinger equation" wrong. If it can't explain > the Born rule then postulating that every result happens just introduces an > extra complication. With the Born rule we can just say one result obtains, > as predicted by the Born probability. > > Brent > Brent, Saying MWI is "only correct if you add the Born rule" is just another way of saying that quantum mechanics, in any interpretation, must account for why we observe Born-rule probabilities. That is not unique to MWI—every interpretation either assumes or derives it. If you take the Born rule as a fundamental postulate, then yes, you can just say "one result obtains" without further justification. But that’s an assumption, not an explanation. The challenge is understanding why quantum probabilities follow this specific rule rather than any other distribution. MWI does not introduce an extra complication—it raises the question of whether the Born rule follows from unitary evolution rather than being an additional postulate. If the Born rule cannot be derived from unitary evolution, that would be a major issue for MWI. But that is not the same as saying it has been proven impossible. Simply assuming one result obtains because the Born rule says so does not address the deeper question of why it holds in the first place. That said, I personally think the real answer to these questions will not be found in MWI or any specific quantum interpretation, but in a computational theory of consciousness. The key issue is not just how probabilities emerge, but how subjective experience is structured within the mathematical framework of physics. If consciousness is fundamentally computational, then probability might arise from the self-sampling of computational processes rather than purely from wavefunction amplitudes. Quentin -- > 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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/37a309e2-4a8a-4896-be66-0f51039bf9fd%40gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/37a309e2-4a8a-4896-be66-0f51039bf9fd%40gmail.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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kApyR1puCgJSi%3DQhX5fFtLEZBG5twnES3xLPxcKVcFqktw%40mail.gmail.com.
