Re: [foar] 18% of (certain) scientists (still) support MWI as of 2011

2013-01-25 Thread Craig Weinberg 


On Friday, January 25, 2013 6:44:14 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
>
> On 24 Jan 2013, at 21:49, meekerdb wrote:
>
>  On 1/24/2013 12:19 PM, Jason Resch wrote: 
>
> Bruno,
>
> What is meant by the informational interpretations?  Is that something 
> like the one Ron Garrett presented?
>
>
> It's the view most advocated by Asher and Fuchs, that the WF is just an 
> encoding of what the experimenter knows about the physical system based on 
> its preparation.
>
>
> Yes. It is close to Pauli and Heisenberg's idea that the quantum state 
> does not describe a "real physical state", but only a relative knowledge 
> state.
>
> The computationalist shift "worlds ==> dreams" should please to both them, 
> and to the MWI defenders, but of course, it can also makes them both 
> nervous. 
>
> Many points of view overlap much more than what their defenders believe. 
> The problem is that they don't try to define terms like "information", 
> "observers", "physical", etc. I would say that more than 50% of the 
> apparent disagreement are really due to vocabulary problem. It is 
> unavoidable in inter and trans-disciplinary studies.
>
> Bruno
>
>
The more people try to define "information" the more that they will find 
that there is nothing there but the presence of sensory-motor experience in 
one set of qualitative modalities, re-presented through another set of the 
same.

Craig


>
>
>
> Brent
>
>
>
> The informational and MW together got 42% of the vote, equal to Copenhagen.
>
> Jason
>
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Bruno Marchal 
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>  On 24 Jan 2013, at 04:03, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:
>>
>>  http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069v1.pdf  See question 12.
>>  
>>
>>  
>>  Interesting. Thanks.
>>
>>  A bit sad, also.
>>
>>  If it takes time to understand the MWI of the SWE (which writes it 
>> almost explicitly), I guess it will take time to understand the universal 
>> machine's many worlds interpretation of arithmetic.
>>
>>  Bruno
>>
>>  
>>http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com
>> .
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
>> everything-li...@googlegroups.com .
>> For more options, visit this group at 
>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>>
>  
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> everything-li...@googlegroups.com .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.2890 / Virus Database: 2639/6054 - Release Date: 01/24/13
>
>
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everyth...@googlegroups.com
> .
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> everything-li...@googlegroups.com .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [foar] 18% of (certain) scientists (still) support MWI as of 2011

2013-01-25 Thread Bruno Marchal 


On 24 Jan 2013, at 21:49, meekerdb wrote:


On 1/24/2013 12:19 PM, Jason Resch wrote:


Bruno,

What is meant by the informational interpretations?  Is that  
something like the one Ron Garrett presented?


It's the view most advocated by Asher and Fuchs, that the WF is just  
an encoding of what the experimenter knows about the physical system  
based on its preparation.


Yes. It is close to Pauli and Heisenberg's idea that the quantum state  
does not describe a "real physical state", but only a relative  
knowledge state.


The computationalist shift "worlds ==> dreams" should please to both  
them, and to the MWI defenders, but of course, it can also makes them  
both nervous.


Many points of view overlap much more than what their defenders  
believe. The problem is that they don't try to define terms like  
"information", "observers", "physical", etc. I would say that more  
than 50% of the apparent disagreement are really due to vocabulary  
problem. It is unavoidable in inter and trans-disciplinary studies.


Bruno






Brent




The informational and MW together got 42% of the vote, equal to  
Copenhagen.


Jason

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Bruno Marchal   
wrote:


On 24 Jan 2013, at 04:03, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069v1.pdf  See question 12.



Interesting. Thanks.

A bit sad, also.

If it takes time to understand the MWI of the SWE (which writes it  
almost explicitly), I guess it will take time to understand the  
universal machine's many worlds interpretation of arithmetic.


Bruno


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything- 
l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en 
.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything- 
l...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en 
.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2890 / Virus Database: 2639/6054 - Release Date:  
01/24/13





--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
Groups "Everything List" group.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en 
.


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
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 post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: [foar] 18% of (certain) scientists (still) support MWI as of 2011

2013-01-24 Thread meekerdb 

On 1/24/2013 12:19 PM, Jason Resch wrote:

Bruno,

What is meant by the informational interpretations?  Is that something like the one Ron 
Garrett presented?


It's the view most advocated by Asher and Fuchs, that the WF is just an encoding of what 
the experimenter knows about the physical system based on its preparation.


Brent




The informational and MW together got 42% of the vote, equal to Copenhagen.

Jason

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Bruno Marchal > wrote:



On 24 Jan 2013, at 04:03, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069v1.pdf  See question 12.



Interesting. Thanks.

A bit sad, also.

If it takes time to understand the MWI of the SWE (which writes it almost
explicitly), I guess it will take time to understand the universal 
machine's many
worlds interpretation of arithmetic.

Bruno


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ 



-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything 
List" group.

To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com 
Version: 2013.0.2890 / Virus Database: 2639/6054 - Release Date: 01/24/13



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: [foar] 18% of (certain) scientists (still) support MWI as of 2011

2013-01-24 Thread Jason Resch 
Bruno,

What is meant by the informational interpretations?  Is that something like
the one Ron Garrett presented?

The informational and MW together got 42% of the vote, equal to Copenhagen.

Jason

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Bruno Marchal  wrote:

>
> On 24 Jan 2013, at 04:03, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:
>
> http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069v1.pdf  See question 12.
>
>
>
> Interesting. Thanks.
>
> A bit sad, also.
>
> If it takes time to understand the MWI of the SWE (which writes it almost
> explicitly), I guess it will take time to understand the universal
> machine's many worlds interpretation of arithmetic.
>
> Bruno
>
>
> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
>
>
>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.

Re: [foar] 18% of (certain) scientists (still) support MWI as of 2011

2013-01-24 Thread Bruno Marchal 


On 24 Jan 2013, at 04:03, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:


http://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069v1.pdf  See question 12.



Interesting. Thanks.

A bit sad, also.

If it takes time to understand the MWI of the SWE (which writes it  
almost explicitly), I guess it will take time to understand the  
universal machine's many worlds interpretation of arithmetic.


Bruno


http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.