On Saturday, September 20, 2025 at 5:31:15 AM UTC-6 John Clark wrote:

On Fri, Sep 19, 2025 at 9:44 AM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote:



*>>Many Worlds has only two fundamental axioms, and they are both simple:*
*1) The quantum wave function contains all the physical information about 
a system.*


*> As well as heart failure of horses? AG*


*Certainly! Microscopic systems have quantum wave functions just like 
microscopic objects do. A dead horse and a living horse are different 
physical states and they contain different physical information. And 
neither physical state is forbidden by Schrodinger's equation. And if 
Schrodinger's equation is deterministic, which it is, then when it comes to 
physical information and therefore physical reality, everything that is not 
forbidden is mandatory.  *


*Why mandatory? How can you know what's forbidden or not? It's great to 
know heart research can be done using S's equation. RFK Jr needs to be 
immediately informed. AG*


  *John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis 
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>*

*2) The quantum wave function evolves according to the Schrödinger 
equation.*

*In some places and at some times the quantum wave function has a very low 
amplitude but is nevertheless greater than zero, therefore according to 
axiom #1 it must be physical, and being physical has consequences. And one 
of those consequences is that the universe is deterministic (because 
Schrodinger's equation is deterministic) and local but NOT realistic. The 
great virtue of Many Worlds is that it takes quantum mechanics at face 
value, it needs no extra machinery to explain measurement or observation. *
 
*By contrast **In David Bohm's quantum interpretation he keeps 
Schrödinger's equation but adds another equation for what he calls the 
"pilot wave" which has some very unusual properties. The pilot wave is 
extremely non-local, it has to take the state of the entire universe into 
account in order to know if it should guide an electron through the right 
slit or the left slit in an experiment, and influences can be 
instantaneous, and distance does not diminish affects so an electron in the 
Andromeda galaxy might be just as important in making the decision of which 
split to go through as an electron that is only 1 foot away.* 

*Also, the pilot wave can affect an electron but an electron cannot affect 
the pilot wave, the wave pushes the particle but the particle can NOT push 
back. This sort of one-way causation has never been observed before. And 
the asymmetry means that matter is real (it always has one definite 
position and velocity) but is fundamentally passive, matter is guided by 
the pilot wave but matter is unable to influence the pilot wave. Human 
Beings are made of matter so we are just puppets, the pilot wave pulls the 
strings. Well OK… Technically we're marionettes not puppets. *

*Bohm and his supporters argue that all of this additional byzantine 
complexity is worth it because it maintains realism. I disagree, I think 
that is far too high a price to pay. At the end of the day all the pilot 
wave does is provide a little arrow that points at a particle and says 
"this is the real particle, ignore all others". This is why detractors of 
pilot wave theory have called it "the disappearing worlds theory" or "Many 
Worlds theory in denial" .   *

*> I suppose I'm using the same reasoning you use in denying SUPER 
DETERMINISM.*


*As I've said before I can't prove that super determinism is wrong but I 
can prove that super determinism is silly. The greater the violation of 
Occam's razor that your theory needs to be true the sillier it is, and by 
that metric it would be impossible to be sillier than super determinism.  *

-- 
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e996f875-49d0-4db5-9bbd-fb6adbfa754dn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to