Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use
RSS feed | RSS help
Introduction
Terms of Use
Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.
By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use RSS feed | RSS help
FQXi FORUM
September 2, 2010
The pdf file is mangled. You cannot read it with any pdf viewer other than Adobe acrobat. For example, it doesn't work with Preview, which is the default pdf viewer in Mac OS X.
post approved
post approved
Same problem as Matt. Couldn't read the file on 'Out of the Dark,' either.
post approved
post approved
Do not fret matt and john because in another universe you were able to open the PDF file.
post approved
post approved
Peter,
I dislike the many worlds interpretation; however, I'm very interested in the measurement problem. If Everett were to convince me that he is right what would he say?
The article mentions that DeWitt "could not feel himself split". Everett retorted that, "critics of Copernicus also said they could not feel themselves moving through the heavens". There is evidence that supports Copernicus. What evidence supports Everett?
If Everett had been aware of quantum uncollapse how would such experiments be explained with his theory? Does this mean that parallel universes can be created and also destroyed?
I'm not sure I understand how Everett allowed physicists to think quantum mechanically, could you clarify that? Lastly, how much did Everett's work on MAD contribute to his depression?
post approved
I dislike the many worlds interpretation; however, I'm very interested in the measurement problem. If Everett were to convince me that he is right what would he say?
The article mentions that DeWitt "could not feel himself split". Everett retorted that, "critics of Copernicus also said they could not feel themselves moving through the heavens". There is evidence that supports Copernicus. What evidence supports Everett?
If Everett had been aware of quantum uncollapse how would such experiments be explained with his theory? Does this mean that parallel universes can be created and also destroyed?
I'm not sure I understand how Everett allowed physicists to think quantum mechanically, could you clarify that? Lastly, how much did Everett's work on MAD contribute to his depression?
post approved
Peter,
In your October 2008 SciAm article, you capture what is often overlooked--the simple non-mystical motivation behind Everett's interpretation; i.e., quantum mechanics is compelled to be nonlocal. Otherwise, the theory is not just incomplete, it is incoherent. Which justifies Stephen Hawking's alleged comment that Many Worlds is "trivially true."
I suppose I agree with Christopher Fuchs in your FQXI article. Further, though, I think it is somewhat tragic that Everett was more against the Copenhagen interpretation than he was for the generalization of QM. This point also comes out in your SciAm article, in exploring the communication between Wheeler and Everett. Great story. I wish you success with the book.
Tom
post approved
In your October 2008 SciAm article, you capture what is often overlooked--the simple non-mystical motivation behind Everett's interpretation; i.e., quantum mechanics is compelled to be nonlocal. Otherwise, the theory is not just incomplete, it is incoherent. Which justifies Stephen Hawking's alleged comment that Many Worlds is "trivially true."
I suppose I agree with Christopher Fuchs in your FQXI article. Further, though, I think it is somewhat tragic that Everett was more against the Copenhagen interpretation than he was for the generalization of QM. This point also comes out in your SciAm article, in exploring the communication between Wheeler and Everett. Great story. I wish you success with the book.
Tom
post approved
Brian,
The Copernicus example is interesting because, as Feyerabend points out in Against Method, his helio-centric theory (which was later shown to be correct) was inconsistent with the "facts" available at the time. Everett, like Bohm, was in a pickle since the "proof" of his theory, he said, is that reality will appear exactly as it does; so believing it is "a matter of taste."
Everett tried to explain why we perceive "our" sinlge branch as classical even though it "exists" in a giant superposition of all physically possible universes.
Everett's universa wave function allowed physics to think about the universe (or multiverse) as NOT dependent upon an external observer, i.e. quantum mechanically.
post approved
post approved
Peter,
Thank you for the reply.
I dislike the MWI, but in a way I suppose it is progress. I do respect Everett for taking on Bohr and his interpretation of quantum physics. If you make the Devil's Pitchfork available for the Kindle then I will definitely buy a copy.
post approved
Thank you for the reply.
I dislike the MWI, but in a way I suppose it is progress. I do respect Everett for taking on Bohr and his interpretation of quantum physics. If you make the Devil's Pitchfork available for the Kindle then I will definitely buy a copy.
post approved
Could it be that just like a cat is assumed to have "9 LIVES", and shroedinger placed a many-life entity into a duality situation with parallel paths, leading to half-life half-dead scenario, then it would be only a natural outcome for someone to evolve a many-world theory?
The shroedinger cat scenario is reponsable for many-world/half-life/half-dead and parralel transportation/entanglement intepretations.
Very thought provoking and really interesting if one replaces a cat with a knowing and intelligent human entity, for he she may choose the path that is:walk over to the hammer and remove the danger that will arise if left to half-life decay!
post approved
The shroedinger cat scenario is reponsable for many-world/half-life/half-dead and parralel transportation/entanglement intepretations.
Very thought provoking and really interesting if one replaces a cat with a knowing and intelligent human entity, for he she may choose the path that is:walk over to the hammer and remove the danger that will arise if left to half-life decay!
post approved
Does the Everett Many-World-Theory imply that there are many Jesuses, and that in some worlds, he is the Son of God, and in others he is the son of satan. What does the Everett MWI have to do with the Bible, or even spirituality, and why is the Templeton Foundation funding research in such junk?
post approved
post approved
Hello everybody to know about me plz visit this site
http://www.articlescreen.com
Thank you
BYby
take care
report post as inappropriate
http://www.articlescreen.com
Thank you
BYby
take care
report post as inappropriate
David, if you don't accept the MWI, then I guess you believe Peter Byrne simultaneously both believed MWI and didn't believe MWI until you asked and he answered, at which point the wave function collapsed and he only disbelieved.
Whereas I think that in another universe, Peter Byrne does believe in the MWI, and that you have only discovered that you are in the branch where he doesn't.
As have I... :)
report post as inappropriate
Whereas I think that in another universe, Peter Byrne does believe in the MWI, and that you have only discovered that you are in the branch where he doesn't.
As have I... :)
report post as inappropriate
Add a New Post