On Sat, Feb 15, 2025 at 6:59 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote:
*>> If what you say is true then quantum mechanics wouldn't need >> probability, it could simultaneously make predictions about momentum and >> position to any arbitrary degree of precision, but quantum mechanics can't >> do that. Therefore I must conclude that either quantum mechanics is wrong >> or you are. * > > > *> How does the HUP imply self-locating uncertainty?* > *There must be a fundamental reason why we can't make predictions better than those allowed by HUP, and self-locating uncertainty is that reason. * > *>> Many Worlds and objective collapse make different predictions, one >> says it happens the other says it doesn't. Experiments are going on right >> now to determine who's right, if they find objective collapse then Many >> Worlds will be proven wrong.* > > >How will they know it's "objective"? Every branch of MWI observes > objective collapse. > *According to Many Worlds nobody observes objective collapse because objective collapse never happens. Many Worlds predicts that everything follows Schrodinger's equation exactly, but Objective Collapse adds in an additional term to the equation that is both nonlinear and randomly determined. Experiments are going on right now in super cold systems that are as isolated from the outside world as possible to look for tiny amounts of spontaneous radiation or heating that Schrodinger's unmodified equation and Many Worlds does not predict. If they find it then Many Worlds is wrong and I will switch over and become an Objective Collapse fan. I don't think that will happen, but I could be wrong, it's certainly an experiment worth making. * *> **If it were merely subjective you'd need to explain how there can be > records and agreement on it. * > *If you make a record of which slit an electron went through in the two slit experiment then you will not see an interference pattern on a screen, but if you don't make a record of it then you will. And if you make a record and place the screen a light year away from the slits but erase that record one second before the electrons hit the screen then you will see an interference pattern. This is certainly odd but it poses no problem for Many Worlds. * > *> One alternative to MWI is QBism which explicitly rejects objective > collapse and thereby disagrees with MWI. * > *All QBism is saying is that you should update your beliefs after making a measurement, that's certainly good advice, you should do that whenever you see the outcome of an experiment, not just those that involve Quantum Mechanics; but QBism doesn't even try to explain what is actually going on. QBism is just Shut Up And Calculate with a more respectable name.* * John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>* nzm -- 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/CAJPayv3ofwKg%3D5sxT3TpsmFbuLrJuQu5R28hiCZZsnSEP0f%3DGQ%40mail.gmail.com.
