On 12/30/2024 4:13 AM, John Clark wrote:
On Sun, Dec 29, 2024 at 9:24 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected]>
wrote:
//
/>I don't find the Occam's razor argument very persuasive. First,
having an infinity of universes does seem very simple. /
*The number of universes is irrelevant because Occam's razor is about
picking the theory that needs the fewest assumptions to explain
observations, it is NOT about picking the theory that produces the
simplest consequences; *
One of my point was that the your assertion about Occam's razor is just
that. There is no proof, nor can there be that this measure of
"simplicity" is what Occam really meant, or is the real and true
simplicity. It is just the revisionist thinking since Occam's time that
has leaned to the "fewest assumptions" idea. His actual "razor" was,
"Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity." Not "assumptions"
but "entities".
*and all those many worlds are the result of the one and only
assumption that Many Worlds makes, everything always obeys
Schrodinger's Equation. *
And it makes the assumption that somehow when we figure it out and we're
really, really, that we will (probably) explain how our world splits off
and the Born rule obtains without anymore assumptions.
*Many World's rivals say everything always obeys Schrodinger's
equation EXCEPT when they don't, like when _you_ _observe_ them. Then
they obey entirely different laws of physics. To make matters even
worse they are very unclear about what "observe" means and what
qualities a thing needs in order to be granted the honorific title
"you". *
Straw man! Nobody says that. And note that the Schrodinger equation is
also unclear except it isolated laboratory experiments (where
"measurement" is clear). It is unclear whether an air molecule bouncing
this way instead of that splits the world or not. Speculation is that
some "amplification" is required but this *not exactly clear*. So don't
gimme that BS about "nothing but the Schrodinger equation".
**
**>**/And if you favor the MWI why not take it all the way like
our friend Bruno and say that everything computable happens. /
*Because Bruno had nothing equivalent to the two slit experiment, and
because Occam's razor says a theory should always make the smallest
assumptions, and "everything computable happens" includes "everything
obeys Schrodinger's equation" BUT it also contains an infinite amount
of other stuff that is unnecessary to explain observations.
*
You mean like an infinite number of universe and not just alpha-nought
number but a continuum infinity of worlds.
/> And when exactly does the world split? /
*Whenever the laws of physics as described by Quantum Mechanicssays
there is a possibility of a change. *
/> Is it within the forward light cone? /
*It is within _A_ forward light cone but if Many Worlds is correct
then there is no such thing as _THE_ forward light cone, except
perhaps the one produced at the first Planck Time after the Big Bang.
But nobody has a good understanding about what was going on that early
in the universe. *
/> And where exactly is the point of that cone? /
*The place and the time that the change had occurred.*
What change? A change that's /"observable"/?*
*
*After that the change radiated outward at either the speed of light
or instantaneously, take your pick it makes no observable difference.
*
/> What happens there that produces the Born rule? /
*What happens is the only thing that could happen if Schrodinger's
Equation is going to produce a set of positive real numbers between 0
and 1 that always add up to exactly one.
*
That doesn't necessarily produce the Born rule. And the Born rule
applies in our sequence of worlds were we observe 1's and 0's not real
numbers between 0 and 1 derived from Schrodinger's equation.
/> Personally I tend to take a more instrumentalist view of QM./
*OK. There's nothing wrong with the "Shut Up And Calculate" quantum
interpretation if you're only interested in predicting what value
you're going to get on your voltmeter and don't care about what's
actually going on.
*
"Actually going on."?? That's pretty funny. What's going on is hubris
and plastering over cracks so that people can feel satisfied in "knowing
what's going on".
Brent
*
*
*John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>*
bid
--
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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1Gvj-nEgpC79QtvCK6Tzah_ObCkfCeVP3C5Au3F7TH2A%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1Gvj-nEgpC79QtvCK6Tzah_ObCkfCeVP3C5Au3F7TH2A%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 [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/a7b1e51b-6b51-4ab7-9af6-8a382042ca6a%40gmail.com.
