4 ms·

What is your preferred interpretation? Mine is pilot wave, treating the wave function as a purely mathematical and nonphysical concept.

• Filligree 10y ago
  Pilot wave theory still requires the wavefunction to exist, with all the same detail as many-worlds, all the same computations. It just then picks a particular timeline and declares that this one is real, these are real particles, and everything else is shadows on the wall. It's thus incompatible with computationalism. I consider this scenario improbable.
  • bmh100 10y ago
    My limited understanding is that the pilot wave is more of a concept regarding embodied in the exact state of the universe. In other words, the pilot wave is the seed in the pseudorandom number generator of the universe.
    • Filligree 10y ago
      I'll admit it does get a little philosophical, but: No. The "pilot wave", in pilot wave theory, is a mathematical object identical to the universal wavefunction of the many-worlds interpretation. As such, if you believe that computation is all is required for consciousness to exist (and there's no separate "is real" tag on the math), then it's an incoherent concept. I fall on that side myself, but I can't convincingly argue that it's the right philosophical stance to take. I've yet to see anyone give a proof, it just seems most likely.
  • openasocket 10y ago
    Isn't this equivalent to a universe with non-determinism?
    • Filligree 10y ago
      No, non-determinism on its own can't reproduce all the predictions of quantum mechanics. That'd be a different theory, and one I believe has been disproven experimentally.