3 ms·

Quantum mechanics is deterministic in most interpretations except Copenhagen, which is losing favor.

by tbabb 6y ago

klysm 6y ago
Is there a term for deterministic but where there is ‘hidden’ state such that it appears random?
- ithkuil 6y ago
  Hidden variable theories don't satisfy the bell equation. There are other interpretations that don't require hidden variables and yet are fully deterministic. There is no free lunch though, so usually these interpretations require you "lose" something else. As a layperson, the one that I can make most sense of is the Everettian interpretation (often called Many Worlds, although I personally find that a source of confusion). In the Everettian interpretation there is only a quantum state and the observer is part of it. Thus the non-determinism and the wave function collapse is just an illusion due to the fact that the observers themselves are in a superposition state (which they are not aware of) and entangled with what they observe.
  - guerrilla 6y ago
    > Hidden variable theories don't satisfy the bell equation. No, local hidden variable theories don't [1]. De Broglie–Bohm pilot wave theory [2] is a non-local hidden variable theory. [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality [2]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory [3]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlXdsyctD50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlXdsyctD50
    - ithkuil 6y ago
      Oh yes, pardon my sloppiness. I was focusing be contrast between determinism an indeterminism and I was giving locality for granted. The Everettian interpretation is fully local, where any non-locality is just an illusion caused by observers observing correlations they cannot otherwise explain if they insist on the impossibility of themselves being made of matter itself being in superposition. EDIT: it's understandably hard to throw away the first person pooling if view and our innate feeling of self and identity. Fuethermor the mechanisms of consciousness are poorly understood. I'd argue that what's making it hard to make progress on understanding consciousness is entangled with what makes it hard to accept the Everettian interpretation (which is the simplest consequence of basic quantum mechanics, nothing is added )

Quantum mechanics is deterministic in most interpretations except Copenhagen, which is losing favor.

by tbabb 6y ago

Quantum mechanics is deterministic in most interpretations except Copenhagen, which is losing favor.

klysm 6y ago

Is there a term for deterministic but where there is ‘hidden’ state such that it appears random?

ithkuil 6y ago
Hidden variable theories don't satisfy the bell equation. There are other interpretations that don't require hidden variables and yet are fully deterministic. There is no free lunch though, so usually these interpretations require you "lose" something else. As a layperson, the one that I can make most sense of is the Everettian interpretation (often called Many Worlds, although I personally find that a source of confusion). In the Everettian interpretation there is only a quantum state and the observer is part of it. Thus the non-determinism and the wave function collapse is just an illusion due to the fact that the observers themselves are in a superposition state (which they are not aware of) and entangled with what they observe.
- guerrilla 6y ago
  > Hidden variable theories don't satisfy the bell equation. No, local hidden variable theories don't [1]. De Broglie–Bohm pilot wave theory [2] is a non-local hidden variable theory. [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_nonlocality [2]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory [3]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlXdsyctD50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlXdsyctD50
  - ithkuil 6y ago
    Oh yes, pardon my sloppiness. I was focusing be contrast between determinism an indeterminism and I was giving locality for granted. The Everettian interpretation is fully local, where any non-locality is just an illusion caused by observers observing correlations they cannot otherwise explain if they insist on the impossibility of themselves being made of matter itself being in superposition. EDIT: it's understandably hard to throw away the first person pooling if view and our innate feeling of self and identity. Fuethermor the mechanisms of consciousness are poorly understood. I'd argue that what's making it hard to make progress on understanding consciousness is entangled with what makes it hard to accept the Everettian interpretation (which is the simplest consequence of basic quantum mechanics, nothing is added )