2016 International Workshop on Quantum Observers

The End of the Many-Worlds? (or Could we save Everett’s interpretation)

This topic contains 3 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Avatar of Miroljub Dugic Miroljub Dugic 1 year, 5 months ago.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #3255

    The aim of this discussion is to compare de Broglie’s (pilot wave interpretation :PWI) and Everett’s interpretation (Many Worlds interpretation: MWI) in order to see how both attempt to solve some of the key issues of quantum mechanics.
    More specifically, I consider the problem of the ontology, the problem of the meaning of probability, and also the problem of psycho-physical parallelism (to use the vocabular of John von Neumann).
    I show that ontology and probability are clearly defined in the PWI but that these concepts are very problematic in the MWI. Concerning the psycho-physical parallelism (the functionalist theory) I give (page 20) an argumentation showing that PWI (or some equivalent model) is the best way to solve the problem.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #3265
    Avatar of Lev Vaidman
    Lev Vaidman
    Member

    I thank Aurelien for citing my works, but his acknowledgement to me at the end of his paper is misleading. Although I tried to explain my views to him in a couple of e-mails, I failed. Reading his presentation of my views I could not recognize them at all. I disagree with everything I saw in Aurelien paper.
    Lev Vaidman

    #3266

    Dear Lev, don’t worry: my aim was only to recognize the influence that your view on MWI has on mine (your work on bohm with the ‘surrealistic’ bullet and the cat was very great as well). I will add a sentence that you dont share my view.
    with best regards Aurélien

    #3281

    Hi Aurelien,

    Nice post!

    Regarding ontology of MWI, it appears that a preferred structure (partition into subsystems, including virtual subsystems) of the Universe is needed. Otherwise sufficiency of decoherence for defining “branches” and/or reality of “world branching” are at stake. More technically: there exist mutually irreducible, simultaneously decohereing structures that do not provide an “emergent structure” (a “pattern”) that could branch.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.