On 9/25/2024 5:10 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 2:52 PM Alan Grayson <agrayson2...@gmail.com>
wrote:
*>> Bohr's Copenhagen interpretation couldn't explain exactly,
or even approximately, what a "measurement" is, *
/> Seriously; this is nonsense. Hardly anything can be explained
"exactly"./
*True but if you can't explain measurement even approximately, and
Copenhagen can't, then for them the word is just a meaningless
sequence of ASCII characters. By contrast Many Worlds gives an
objective clearly defined meaning to the concept, X is measured
(a.k.a. observed) by Y if and only if X and Y have become quantum
entangled.
*
*An excessively broad and also too narrow "clear objective meaning".
It's too broad in that every collision of two N2 molecules entangles
them. It's too narrow that Many Worlds says that every measurement
(interaction?) that has two or more possible outcomes causes the world
(universe? future light cone?) to split into two copies that are
indentical except for the measured values.*
> this critique is way overblown IMO. When we measure an
observable, name any observable, don't we know what we're measuring?
*According to Copenhagen a measurement can collapse the wave function,
that's a pretty impressive power but can a dog performa
measurement?Can a cockroach, can an amoeba, can a rock? When you
observe an electron you collapse the wave function of the electron,
but if I observe you do I collapse your wave function? Copenhagen has
no answer to any of these questions.
*
Neo-Copenhagen says that a measurement is an interaction that leaves a
record on which there is intersubjective agreement(i.e. classical).
Decoherence is part of making such records, but not all decoherence is
measurement.
/> Maybe the electrons, all of them, and possibly everything else,
wase entangled long ago, in the early universe when everything was
in close proximity? AG/
*All the electrons in the observable universe probably were entangled
long ago,*
Were they measured? See above.
Brent*
*
*Many Worlds certainly thinks so, that's why it claims that the entire
universe could be described by one gigantic universal wave function
that, depending on circumstances, can often be simplified to such an
enormous degree you can actually use it to make calculations. Billions
of years ago all the electrons in the observable universe became
entangled because they were jammed up close together and because
Quantum Entanglement is a thing, but Quantum Disentanglement is also a
thing. Today it's possible to isolate a small group of electrons (or
atoms or even large molecules) for a very short time from you and from
your experimental equipment and the rest of the universe; that's what
happens when you perform the two slit experiment and see an
interference pattern. But that can only happen if you are _NOT_
entangled with the electrons, and that can only happen if you do _NOT_
have which-way information.
*
*>>___Everybod_y believes the _observable_ universe is finite. *
*
*
/> Now suddenly you appeal to "belief"./
*Don't be silly.I can observe the observable universe by definition,
and if I can observe something then it must be finite. I challenge you
to find somebody who claims the observable universe is not observable,
or claims that they can observe infinity. *
>**/I appeal to the fact that the visible universe is expanding and
I can turn the clock back, to ANY time in the past, and put a
finite sphere around it!/
*Do you believe the observable universe is the only part of the
universe that exists?If you do then you must also believe that Earth
is the center of the universe, or at least very very close to it,
because space is flat at the largest scale, or at least very very
close to flat. *
/> You seem to have an inclination to put me down./
*If you treat me politely thenI will treat you the same way.*
/> I think/
*Think or believe?*
*
*
/> the unobservable part came into existence during Inflation, a
finite process, so it is also finite and the _whole_ bubble is
finite. I don't claim I can prove it. AG/
*As I said before, even if inflation never happened there would still
be galaxies expanding away from us faster than the speed of light, and
it's an observational fact that galaxies are not just moving at high
speed away from us, they are _ACCELERATING_ away. And with or without
inflation it would still be true that light travels at a finite speed,
and the Big Bang happened a finite number of years ago, so that alone
severely limits what we are able to see, or will ever be able to see.
*
John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
ymp
--
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/CAJPayv3xykx87aP3Cb9bzqeaMm08H28Q2kNxhZaJ_qR9AEu_8A%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv3xykx87aP3Cb9bzqeaMm08H28Q2kNxhZaJ_qR9AEu_8A%40mail.gmail.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/04bc8c21-af7c-4f51-a8f5-34ed564b4120%40gmail.com.
