On Wed, Nov 29, 2023, 8:34 PM Brent Meeker <meekerbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 11/29/2023 4:17 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 10:49 PM Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Wed, 29 Nov 2023 at 12:34, Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 12:02 PM Stathis Papaioannou <stath...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>>> The Born rule allows you to calculate the probability of what outcome >>>> you will see in a Universe where all outcomes occur. >>>> >>> >>> You are still conflating incompatible theories. The Born rule is a rule >>> for calculating probabilities from the wave function -- it says nothing >>> about worlds or existence. MWI is a theory about the existence of many >>> worlds. These theories are incompatible, and should not be conflated. >>> >> >> “The Born rule is a rule for calculating probabilities from the wave >> function -- it says nothing about worlds or existence” -and- “MWI is a >> theory about the existence of many worlds” are not incompatible statements. >> > > Perhaps that is the wrong way to look at it. The linearity of the > Schrodinger equation implies that the individuals on all branches are the > same: there is nothing to distinguish one of them as "you" and the others > as mere shadows or zombies. In other words, they are all "you". So you are > the person on the branch with all spins up and your probability of seeing > this result is one, since this branch certainly exists, and, by linearity, > "you" are the individual on that branch. This is inconsistent with the > claim that the Born rule gives the probability that "you" will see some > particular result. As we have seen, the probability that "you" will see all > ups in one, whereas the Born probability for this result is 1/2^N. These > probability estimates are incompatible. > > > How is this different than throwing a die and seeing it came up 6. Is > that incompatible with that result having probability 1/6? Why don't we > have a multiple-worlds theory of classical probabilities? > It's interesting, Feynman and others had this exact debate in that reference scerir provided (asking how quantum probabilities are different from dice rolls, Feynman thought there was an important difference). Jason > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e08cb2fe-f896-4300-8214-3318ca5c1069%40gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/e08cb2fe-f896-4300-8214-3318ca5c1069%40gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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/CA%2BBCJUi2m%3DTHkW8wKQZFsxHuUFtRwh6ZR8h7YPe119zZiARnPA%40mail.gmail.com.
