3 ms·
The fact that we observe decoherence is the reason that people talk about "splitting". If things were consistent (either behaving in a classical or "quantum" m
by CuriouslyC 7y ago
The fact that we observe decoherence is the reason that people talk about "splitting". If things were consistent (either behaving in a classical or "quantum" mannner), the idea that the universal wavefunction was in constant superposition would be much more intuitive.
Also, your assumption that there is no "collapse" is predicated on the notion that whatever wavefunction amplitude is modeling is a continuous variable, but IMO it is much more likely that it is discrete. If that thing is discrete, as the universe evolves, some states will cease to exist simply due to the fact that their measure will fall below the unit value. When the measure of all states but one fell below that unit, that would essentially be a collapse.
- mlthoughts2018 7y agoI disagree about your claim re: decoherence. Decoherence is just when any informational aspect of a system leaks such that the mind of an observer can update it’s state of knowledge to know which Everett branch it had been on all along. Nothing “splits” .. you just discover which version of “you” that you are.. which of the continuum of possible outcomes your personal measurement happened to see. Likewise I think you are incorrect about your discreteness claim. I agree with you that QM suggests the nature of reality is fundamentally discrete, but that reality also places the Born rule as a continuous mixture model across discrete states, and this is specifically what allows there to be a continuum of universes of every measurement regardless of whether the outcome is continuous or discrete.. like reality’s own Lesbesgue-Stieltjes measure.