On 10 Jun 2015, at 05:16, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Bruno Marchal wrote:
On 09 Jun 2015, at 15:11, Bruce Kellett wrote:
You appear to want to draw this conclusion from FPI. But in a
discussion with Liz a while back, I challenged this interpretation
of your teleportation thought experiments leading to FPI. It was
readily shown that such thought experiments were completely
orthogonal to quantum mechanics and the MWI.
No, You stopped at step 4 (which is already better than John
Clark). You need AUDA to get the math of the FPI, and to compare it
to physics.
We have answered this, but you come back again on what has already
been explained in detail: please reread the posts.
As I recall the discussion, you agreed that FPI in the teleportation
experiments had nothing to do with MWI of quantum mechanics.
It has obviously something to do. Everett use it in the context of
self-superposition. What I said is that they are different notions,
not that they are not related. Normally, the FPI shopuld lead to the
quantum MWI, when taken from the material points of view.
You said that you had only ever raised MWI as an illustration to
help those who were familiar with Everettian quantum mechanics to
understand the concept of FPI.
That can help, to avoid a frontal shock with the self-multiplication
idea. This list is absed in part to an acceptation of Everett
formulation of QM.
FPI in the teleportation scenarios, and later in the UDA, have
nothing to do with the MWI of quantum mechanics, and one cannot be
used to support or justify the other.
The one in the QM MW use the general idea defining the classical FPI.
And UDA shows that the one of the QM MW, if the quantum is physical (s
it seems to be), must be retrieved from the FPI, in the material
hypostases.
Similarly for your attempt to bring quantum logic to your cause.
Quantum logic was devised by von Neumann in the context of the
collapse interpretation of QM, together with the use of projection
operators. In Everettian many-worlds interpretations, there are no
projection operators, and quantum logic does not have a footing.
In fact, it has been pointed out that there is no such thing as a
specifically "quantum" logic -- there is just ordinary predicate
logic and a theory in which some operators do not commute. When
you can derive the non-commutation of the position and momentum
operators from comp, I might be a little more impressed.
UDA formulates the problem, and by the way, the non-commutation of
some observable is already proved.
OK. For what set of quantum operators have you demonstrated non-
commutation?
For the "yes-no" operator in general. They are given and construct
from the quantization ([]<>A) in the logic Z1*. It is rather long to
describe, and you have shown no interest for the small amount of
technic needed to make sense of the material hypostases. We can come
back on this later, if you are more interested.
Of course position and momentum are not yet derived, and it is not
clear if they will be derived.
If they are not, comp fails a crucial test....
That is not entirely obvious. It might be possible that time and space
are more geographical than physical notion, in which case, time and
space would not be derivable. Hamiltonian with gravity and space-time
structure might be contingent. Open problem. To be sure, I have some
conjecture which would entail that space and time existence belong to
the physical. I have explained this, but this needs Temperley Lieb
algebra, the braid group, and some relation with the comp Quantum Logic.
But, anyway, UDA shows first the *necessity* of all this. I am still
waiting your non-comp explanation of consciousness. Comp explains
already why there is consciousness, and why there might be matter (in
a testable way) capable of stabilizing the consciousness flux.
Bruno
Bruce
--
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.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
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.
