Re: Born's rule from almost nothing

It is a short paper. I will see what I can make of it in the near future. LC On Saturday, December 26, 2020 at 7:48:07 AM UTC-6 cloud...@gmail.com wrote: > Saw this via https://twitter.com/skdh/status/1342435394038726660 > > Sabine Hossenfelder @skdh > *Got an email tonight that my paper was

Re: Born's rule from almost nothing

I think she believes in superdeterminism. Hence, IMO, not a reliable source. But I'll look at her paper anyway. AG On Saturday, December 26, 2020 at 6:48:07 AM UTC-7 cloud...@gmail.com wrote: > Saw this via https://twitter.com/skdh/status/1342435394038726660 > > Sabine Hossenfelder @skdh > *Got

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

Correction2 (for typos) on spin scenario: Suppose in THIS world an observer measures spin UP. Then, according to the MWI, in another NEWLY CREATED WORLD, the NEWLY CREATED OBSERVER measures spin DN. On the next measurement in THIS world, some spin in measured, say DN, and in ANOTHER CREATED

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

Correction on spin scenario: Suppose in THIS world an observer measures spin UP. According to the MWI. Then in another world or branch the NEWLY CREATED measures spin DN. On the next measurement in THIS world, some spin in measured, say DN, and in ANOTHER world or branch ANOTHER NEWLY CREATED

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

Fact is there's no need to bring in pretentious big brains from Australia to show that Born's rule makes no sense in the context of the MWI. For simplicity, consider a spin experiment where the observer measures spin UP in THIS world, and another world (or branch) is created where spin DN is

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

Bruno writes: "It is a theorem. No universal machine can determine which computations run it, .. " Do we need a 'constructor theory'? That is to say a set of 'principles' under which we could show whether or not a 'universal constructor' can exist?

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 23 Dec 2020, at 03:29, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 12:45 PM Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 10:58, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 10:45 AM Stathis Papaioannou

Born's rule from almost nothing

Saw this via https://twitter.com/skdh/status/1342435394038726660 Sabine Hossenfelder @skdh *Got an email tonight that my paper was accepted for publication. ...* *Born's rule from almost nothing* Sabine Hossenfelder https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.14175 Quantum mechanics does not make definite

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 23 Dec 2020, at 00:44, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 10:35 AM Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > On Wed, 23 Dec 2020 at 09:15, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 9:07 AM Stathis Papaioannou

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 8:11 AM Bruno Marchal wrote: *> John Clark’s attempt to refute the Digital Mechanist First Person > Indeterminacy.* No. I am not arrogant enough to dispute it. I am "the first person" (I guess) and I don't know everything, very often "I" don't know what's going to

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 22 Dec 2020, at 22:52, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 2:37 AM Bruno Marchal > wrote: >> Am Mo, 21. Dez 2020, um 21:35, schrieb Bruce Kellett: >>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 10:56 PM John Clark >> > wrote: >>> >>> On

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 22 Dec 2020, at 21:14, 'scerir' via Everything List > wrote: > > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > All the copies could be conscious or all could be zombies; none are > privileged. > > "In truth there is only one mind. Oneness it is the doctrine of the > Upanishads." As far as I remember

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 22 Dec 2020, at 19:12, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > On 12/22/2020 12:35 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 18:21, Bruce Kellett > > wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 5:58 PM Stathis Papaioannou >

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 22 Dec 2020, at 09:47, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 7:35 PM Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 18:21, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 5:58 PM Stathis Papaioannou

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 22 Dec 2020, at 07:58, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > > On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 08:51, Bruce Kellett > wrote: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 8:47 AM Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 08:35, Bruce Kellett

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 21 Dec 2020, at 12:55, John Clark wrote: > > > On Sun, Dec 20, 2020 at 1:38 AM Bruce Kellett > wrote: > > > MWI is incompatible with the Born Rule > > How do you figure that? Good question. For me it is an open problem to decide if the MWI does or not

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

> On 19 Dec 2020, at 11:18, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Saturday, December 19, 2020 at 1:30:17 AM UTC-7 sce...@libero.it wrote: > https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.07068 > Randomness? What randomness? > > Klaas Landsman >

David Deutsch paper

Interesting paper by David Deutsch, on MWI. https://arxiv.org/abs/1508.02048 Already known maybe, but I was not aware of ... -- 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,

Re: Irreducible randomness in QM

On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 at 17:04, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 4:02 PM Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > >> On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 at 14:14, Bruce Kellett >> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Dec 26, 2020 at 2:08 PM Stathis Papaioannou >>> wrote: >>> On Sat, 26 Dec 2020 at 13:01, Bruce