This group tends to relate concepts back to MWI. Perhaps CI is a useful way
to think as well...
At a given point in time, a thinking entity is only aware of a small subset
of its surroundings. This suggests an ensemble of all mathematical
possibilities that are consistent with that mind in that
Title: Re: Copenhagen interpretation Beables (to be or not
to
At 18:40 +0100 19/07/2002, Gordon ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> Everett was not center around mind
either ask David about (I believe)
> his 1977
> conversation with Everett in which he said his theory was
Manyworlds and
&
Saibal Mitra wrote:
>MWI is a fully deterministic theory, but it is not the
>only deterministic theory consistent with QM.
>
>I believe that 't Hooft's theory is more natural from the point of view that
>universes are programs.
I don't believe that universes are programs. If comp is true, firs
Hooft has shown how QM can emerge
out of
> > a deterministic theory. In this case QM has to be interpreted according
to
> > the Copenhagen interpretation.
> >
> [Gordon]
> Why, if anything it would be closer to Bohm(1952 Mech version) or
> MWI(1957 version) than saying tha
erminism at the Planck Scale
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0104219
[4] Quantum Mechanics and Determinism
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0105105
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van: "Bruno Marchal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Aan: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Verzonden: vrijdag 12
TECTED]>
Cc: "FoR" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 8:11 AM
Subject: Copenhagen interpretation
> This all assumes that photons, electrons, etc. are real. We don't know
that.
> If you were Einstein, and you were faced with Bell&
At 15:46 +0200 12/07/2002, Dirac wrote (through Scerir!):
>One can always hope that there will
>be future developments which will lead to a drastically different
>theory from the present quantum mechanics and for which
>there may be a partial return of determinism.
But QM-without-collapse *is* a
#x27;t exist. They are mere mathematical tools to compute
> the outcome of experiments. The real underlying theory of Nature could be
> still be deterministic. Recently 't Hooft has shown how QM can emerge out of
> a deterministic theory. In this case QM has to be interpreted according
atical tools to compute
the outcome of experiments. The real underlying theory of Nature could be
still be deterministic. Recently 't Hooft has shown how QM can emerge out of
a deterministic theory. In this case QM has to be interpreted according to
the Copenhagen interpretation.
- Oo
9 matches
Mail list logo
