3 ms·
I don't see many-world arising from decoherence, please elaborate. Decoherence doesn't give you single outcomes, but it gives you a classical probability distr
by remcob 7y ago
I don't see many-world arising from decoherence, please elaborate.
Decoherence doesn't give you single outcomes, but it gives you a classical probability distribution (like an enthropic ensemble) over pure quantum states, with the pure quantum states having reduced coherence (i.e. they 'look classical').
Classical probability distributions are nothing new, we don't need a many worlds interpretation to explain the butterfly effect.
Quantum states with a small amount of residual superposition also seem fine to me, as long as you are willing to accept that the world is ultimately quantum and not classical. That we don't see any quantum effects in daily life is just because the scales are too small, similar to how we don't observe relativistic effects because the scales are too large, or how we don't observe the atomicity of water. But in all these cases we can do experiments to reveal the true nature.
- akvadrako 7y agoSo during decoherence you don’t have classical worlds - the probabilities interfere so you can’t ignore the other terms. Over time that interference reduces, but as you say never disappears completely. But at no point does one world even approximately emerge - it’s always many. I can say only the one I experience is real, but there’s no justification for it. Your main problem though is thinking classically - you can't justify your theory by saying it can be reduced (after an infinite amount of time) to an old way of thinking. Classical probability is fraught with issues; just saying it’s always been acceptable isn’t true nor a rational argument.
- Decoherent 7y agoWhat are the issues with Classical probability relevant to accepting there being a single world?