show all replies (4 not shown)

hide replies

show all replies (1 not shown)

hide replies

This article does not compute without a lot of background information. For example, someone invented an new term for quantum phase coherence which is renamed contextuality. Great, that is what we need...anopther term to describe something that we do not understand understand in the first place.

Here is a blurb from a past article that would have been helpful here:

"The term...

view entire post

This article does not compute without a lot of background information. For example, someone invented an new term for quantum phase coherence which is renamed contextuality. Great, that is what we need...anopther term to describe something that we do not understand understand in the first place.

Here is a blurb from a past article that would have been helpful here:

"The term "contextuality" simply refers to the weird way in which a property of a quantum particle can depend on the context of the experiments you do to investigate it, even if there seems to be no good reason why that should be so. "It’s like the colour of your socks affecting the experiment," says Joseph Emerson, an FQXi member and quantum physicist at the University of Waterloo, Ontario, who also researches this area of physics. (See "The Quantum Truth Seeker.") This doesn’t hold true in the everyday macroscopic world: a given playing card in a deck is either black or red, and it stays that way regardless of whether anyone looks at it or not, or the way in which they look. This steadfastness does not always apply to quantum systems, where properties may not be set until they are observed, and when and how measurements are carried out can change the outcome of the experiment."

Yes. Ordinary classical reality does not decohere very fast and so we think of classical gravity reality as permanent. A playing card is either red or black...but that will that be true for all time. In ten years, one thousand years, or one million years, the playing card will indeed be something else. In other words, even our classical reality is subject to a very slow decoherence rate. The usually very slow classical decoherence gives us the illusion of permanence and locality.

In contrast to classical states, quantum states usually decohere very rapidly into classical states. What seems strange is that quantum states can actually remain coherent for very long times and over very long time separations. This kind of phase coherence makes no classical sense, i.e., that we can know the state of a particle across the universe just because we know the state of an entangled particle right here right now.

Any discussion about qubits that does not include decoherence rates leaves out a necessary factor for any quantum computer. Decoherence is more than just the inevitable scrambling of information. Decoherence provides the key for understanding all of our quantum reality.

view post as summary

show all replies (1 not shown)

hide replies

show all replies (1 not shown)

hide replies

From Article:

"God’s Omniscience?

It was through these interviews that Cabello discovered that Specker wanted to study quantum reality—whether it was indeterministic, as standard quantum theory asserts, or could instead be described by a deterministic hidden-variables theory—in part, to better understand deep religious questions. Could God be omniscient, if reality itself is...

view entire post

From Article:

"God’s Omniscience?

It was through these interviews that Cabello discovered that Specker wanted to study quantum reality—whether it was indeterministic, as standard quantum theory asserts, or could instead be described by a deterministic hidden-variables theory—in part, to better understand deep religious questions. Could God be omniscient, if reality itself is not set until it is observed by humans?"

Sum Over Futures

Sum Over Futures (SOF) is the CTMU interpretation of quantum mechanics. In SOF, quantum phenomena are not random (acausal), but obey higher-order causal invariants. These invariants tend to maximize generalized utility as the universe evolves. Langan observes that due to quantum uncertainty,

Chris Langan said:

[T]he last states of a pair of interacting particles are generally insufficient to fully determine their next states. This, of course, raises a question: how are their next states actually determined? What is the source of the extra tie-breaking measure of determinacy required to select their next events ("collapse their wave functions")?[1]

The answer, he writes, is neither "randomness" nor distributed laws of causality, but rather higher-order causation, involving nonrandom temporally-extensive relationships not wholly attributable to distributed laws. In this picture, the universe sums over timelines to extract the utility of possible futures and selects the most utile configurations for actualization. This "sum over futures" is enabled by the Extended Superposition Principle (ESP) under the guidance of the Telic Principle.

Sum over futures involves an atemporal (existing or considered without relation to time) generalization of “process” (from past participle stem of procedure "go forward"), telic recursion (before determining the next state, Reality takes all of the past and future into account and then chooses a particular state on the basis of its own values), through which the universe (Reality) effects on-the-fly (as time passes, in other words, at every moment) maximization of a global (over all of Reality) self-selection parameter (measurement), generalized utility (what the universal Desire hopes to achieve).

http://ctmucommunity.org/wiki/Sum_Over_Futures

The CTMU is based on the premise that not only does life evolve, but the universe does as well. And the collapse of the wave-function plays a fundamental role in its evolution. In other words, it is atemporally communicating between past, present and future in order to maximize a quantifiable self-selection parameter to produce the best outcomes. The Uncertainty Principle states that pairs of properties of particles such as position and momentum cannot be determined simultaneously, this then leads us to the conclusion that reality branches off into many possible futures. This is good news, because if it atemporally communicated a doomed future for mankind it can always retroactively adjust itself for the greater good. It appears that the CTMU is empirical after all.

Further reading on Sum Over Futures: https://warosu.org/sci/thread/6658825

view post as summary

- “Could God be omniscient, if reality itself is not set until it is observed by humans? “ –

First, let us change the word “God” with “Nature” in order to avoid any offense. A simple dialogue follows:

- What if a cat observed the “particle” of the exp? Will the result be changed?

– Of course it would. But no cat is able to observe the “particle” as it...

view entire post

- “Could God be omniscient, if reality itself is not set until it is observed by humans? “ –

First, let us change the word “God” with “Nature” in order to avoid any offense. A simple dialogue follows:

- What if a cat observed the “particle” of the exp? Will the result be changed?

– Of course it would. But no cat is able to observe the “particle” as it does not have the appropriate equipment for this.

– OK. What if another “particle” (e.g. electron, photon) observed our “particle”?

– Hm. This is a good quest, but we consider living creatures as observers and not “particles”.

– The equipment of measurement we have used for observation is a living creature?

– What do you mean, the “particle” of exp is always observed by something and this is contextuality?

– YES. In a sense, contextuality, as humans like to say it, is the same thing with "entanglement" because anything has been born by an entanglement procedure in the past. This interconnection of anything with anything in the Universe is one of the causes that weirdness quantum theory seems to have. The other missing part is the duality of the reality we are all living in. We tried to host two realities into one without success.

– Though you went too far for me, can you explain what do you imply?

– Let us suppose that reality is consisted by two (sub-)realities, red(R) and blue(B). These two are inseparable and they both shape our whole reality (R+B). We are able to sense only the R one. So far we have formalized two theories (GR and QM) that are not compatible.

– So what?

– You always wait for a ready solution. Try to get your brain to work. Anyway, What if one theory (GR) is dealing with R part and the other (QM) incorporates both R and B?

– Stop, I think I got you. These two theories would seem incompatible because QM would be like having some “hidden variables” that would be undetectable through GR. Furthermore, whenever these “hidden variables” play a role, by enforcing R to “strange” results, we would discover a new “paradox”.

– I think you got the point …

view post as summary