On 3/1/2015 4:03 PM, LizR wrote:
On 27 February 2015 at 16:51, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:On 2/26/2015 7:10 PM, Jason Resch wrote:On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:57 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 2/26/2015 3:16 PM, LizR wrote:On 27 February 2015 at 10:01, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net <mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote:MWI predicts the same as QM+collapse.Only because it assumes the Born rule applies to give a probability interpretation to the density matrix. But Everettista's either ignore the need for the Born rule or they suppose it can be derived from the SWE (although all attempts have fallen short). This is an important point. Do /any/ interpretations explain the Born rule? If so, that would be a reason to prefer them to the MWI.Gleason's theorem says the Born rule is the only consistent way to assign probabilities to states in Hilbert space (showing Born had good intuition). So then the mystery of the Born rule is solved. I don't see why/how adding collapse solves anything.I adds that one of the probable states happens. MWI fails to add that. So collapse adds one extra postulate, yet both interpretations explain the observed facts?
MWI doesn't explain the probabilities. Brent -- 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. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
