On Sun, Nov 20, 2022 at 7:29 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote:
*> The experimenter is just one copy* And that pinpoints the error in your logic right there. *> Many worlds does not explain why I, for example, see only z-spin-up and > not z-spin-down. To make sense of that, we need a viable concept of > probability and the Born rule.* Gleason's theorem proved mathematically that if you want this thing called "probability" to have the property that it is always positive and never negative, and the property that if you add up all the "probabilities" they always add up to exactly 100% , then the Born Rule can be derived from quantum mechanics provided you make the assumption of non-reality (sometimes called Quantum contextuality), that is to say if you assume that an unmeasured quality does NOT have one and only one value. Many Worlds does make that assumption, or rather it makes the assumption that Schrodinger's equation means what it says, and once you do that you have no choice but to accept non-reality. You can still save reality but to do so you must make additional assumptions (such as the assumption that Schrodinger's equation does NOT mean what it says), that's why some call Many Worlds bare bones, no nonsense quantum mechanics, it has no silly bells and whistles cluttering things up. And that's the sort of thing William of Ockham would approve of. I admit that does not prove Many Worlds is correct but at least it passes its first test, and it proves that conventional everyday assumptions about the nature of reality must be dead wrong; you're never going to find a quantum interpretation that feels obvious and intuitively true and is also consistent with experimental observations. So if Many Worlds is incorrect then something even stranger must be true. *> Many worlds does not explain why I, for example, see only z-spin-up and > not z-spin-down.* And Bruce Kellett does not explain what exactly the personal pronoun "I" means in the context of Many Worlds. In Many Worlds for every state that the laws of physics allows a particle to be in there is a Bruce Kellett observing that state; so of course Mr. I will observe one and only one state. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> trb -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3NTXTaa-Od_JTEKvvmwns6cHqYuSuUs4ZQRNdQH%2BsXjw%40mail.gmail.com.
