Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 3:32:08 PM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:52 PM, > wrote: > > ​> ​ >> I think every macro system, although comprised of a huge number of >> individual constituents, is in one definite state; > > > ​No object large

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 15/11/2017 1:18 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Nov 2017, at 22:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 14/11/2017 2:07 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2017, at 23:05, Bruce Kellett wrote: What really annoys me is the continued claim that many worlds eliminates the need for non-locality. It does

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:52 PM, wrote: ​> ​ > I think every macro system, although comprised of a huge number of > individual constituents, is in one definite state; ​No object large enough to see with ​ your unaided ​can is in one definite state, that is to say can

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/14/2017 3:17 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: HOWEVER, if you prefer, forget about number theory and consider the FINITE AGE of our universe, the observable and unobservable regions. It's been expanding for 13.8 billion years, so its spatial extent must be FINITE. That only shows

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:05:22AM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > One of the strongest arguments for MWI was that it eliminates the concept of > a conscious observer from the interpretation of quantum mechanics. I disagree. The strongest argument is that it removes the need for a mysterious

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 6:49:33 PM UTC-7, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:05:22AM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > > > One of the strongest arguments for MWI was that it eliminates the > concept of > > a conscious observer from the interpretation of quantum

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 15/11/2017 12:44 am, smitra wrote: On 14-11-2017 09:23, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 14/11/2017 5:51 pm, smitra wrote: Within this model, Bob does not decohere until that time he is told what Alice has found. That is simply not true. Decoherence is not subject to a particular person's

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 6:31:20 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 11/14/2017 3:17 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 3:32:08 PM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:52 PM, wrote: >> >> ​> ​ >>> I think

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 4:17:29 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 3:32:08 PM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:52 PM, wrote: >> >> ​> ​ >>> I think every macro system, although comprised of a huge

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 15/11/2017 12:47 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 at 8:54 am, Bruce Kellett > wrote: I don't think you have fully understood the scenario I have outlined. There is no collapse, many worlds is assumed

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/14/2017 6:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Nov 2017, at 22:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 14/11/2017 2:07 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2017, at 23:05, Bruce Kellett wrote: What really annoys me is the continued claim that many worlds eliminates the need for non-locality. It

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 15/11/2017 12:49 pm, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:05:22AM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: One of the strongest arguments for MWI was that it eliminates the concept of a conscious observer from the interpretation of quantum mechanics. I disagree. The strongest argument is

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/14/2017 7:46 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 15/11/2017 12:49 pm, Russell Standish wrote: On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:05:22AM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: One of the strongest arguments for MWI was that it eliminates the concept of a conscious observer from the interpretation of quantum

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 02:46:21PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 15/11/2017 12:49 pm, Russell Standish wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:05:22AM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > > One of the strongest arguments for MWI was that it eliminates the concept > > > of > > > a conscious observer

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 14/11/2017 5:51 pm, smitra wrote: On 13-11-2017 03:52, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 13/11/2017 12:15 pm, smitra wrote: On 12-11-2017 22:54, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 13/11/2017 7:19 am, smitra wrote: On 12-11-2017 11:21, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 12/11/2017 9:14 pm, smitra wrote: On 12-11-2017

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 at 8:54 am, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > I don't think you have fully understood the scenario I have outlined. > There is no collapse, many worlds is assumed throughout. Alice splits > according to her measurement result. Both copies of Alice go to meet

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 14-11-2017 09:23, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 14/11/2017 5:51 pm, smitra wrote: On 13-11-2017 03:52, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 13/11/2017 12:15 pm, smitra wrote: On 12-11-2017 22:54, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 13/11/2017 7:19 am, smitra wrote: On 12-11-2017 11:21, Bruce Kellett wrote: On

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 9:52:32 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 9:38:54 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, November 13, 2017 at 4:22:08 PM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 1:24 AM,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 13 Nov 2017, at 22:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 14/11/2017 2:07 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov 2017, at 23:05, Bruce Kellett wrote: What really annoys me is the continued claim that many worlds eliminates the need for non-locality. It does not, and neither Bruno nor anyone else has

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 13 Nov 2017, at 22:40, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, November 12, 2017 at 11:50:00 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, November 12, 2017 at 11:24:15 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Sunday, November 12, 2017 at 11:15:33 AM UTC-7, John Clark wrote:

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/14/2017 3:17 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday, November 14, 2017 at 3:32:08 PM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 11:52 PM, wrote: ​> ​ I think every macro system, although comprised of a huge number of