4 ms·

Who says that only one of those two results actually occurs? Only one is observed, which is a rather different thing.

• pdonis 6y ago
  If you subscribe to an interpretation like the MWI, then yes, you would say both results occur, not just one. But you aren't basing that on decoherence; you're basing that on your chosen interpretation. Decoherence, by itself, is equally consistent with a collapse interpretation that says only one result actually occurs.
  • rcxdude 6y ago
    It is based on decoherence: no extra assumptions are required to derive the MWI, and you need arbitrary assumptions to get any other interpretation.
    • pdonis 6y ago
      > It is based on decoherence MWI is consistent with decoherence, but the choice of MWI vs. other interpretations is not based on decoherence; it can't be, because decoherence is consistent with all QM interpretations, not just the MWI, so decoherence can't possibly be the basis for choosing any one QM interpretation. > no extra assumptions are required to derive the MWI Yes, there are; you have to assume the Born rule. Various attempts have been made to derive the Born rule in the context of the MWI, but none of them have gained general acceptance as having been successful.