5 ms·

This only works if the many-worlds-interpretation is true, which has not been confirmed

by LinAGKar 5y ago

nkrisc 5y ago
And if we’re in one of the universes where it is true.
- ravi-delia 5y ago
  This is a common misconception, so if you're just joking I'll prepare myself to be wooshed in the hopes it helps someone else reading this. There is a concept of many universes which permits slightly differing laws of physics (actually different fundamental constants), but many worlds isn't that one. Many Worlds just says that quantum wavefunctions don't collapse. It doesn't posit any "universe" that the Copenhagen interpretation doesn't allow, it just lets them exist side by side.
  - nkrisc 5y ago
    It was a joke but your comment was interesting nonetheless.
    - medstrom 5y ago
      You sound like you'd be interested in Max Tegmark's "Our Mathematical Universe". There are probably multiple levels of multiverses, and in our local "stack" we have 4, where the Many Worlds mechanism is sitting on level 3. Some don't have this level 3, but may have fewer or more levels, using mechanisms foreign to this multiverse, depending on their laws of physics.
beecafe 5y ago
It's not possible to distinguish between many worlds or any other interpretation, so it will never will be confirmed (nor will the Copenhagen interpretation). The only ones that can be confirmed are the "objective collapse" theories, as they produce very slightly different predictions than normal QM.
- ravi-delia 5y ago
  I think it's fair to say that if we ever put a full human being into superposition with a large enough environment for decoherence to happen within the experiment, many worlds is all but confirmed.
  - zanecodes 5y ago
    This relates to an interpretation of QM that I have not personally found much reading material on, the idea that wavefunction collapse is actually just entanglement; that is to say that as soon as a system in a superposition interacts with the outside universe, the outside universe becomes entangled with the system, thus putting the entire universe into a superposition where both outcomes are observed.
    - ravi-delia 5y ago
      That's precisely Many Worlds! The process you describe is a pretty close match for what's called decoherence. Perhaps you'll have more luck with those search terms, there are quite a few really good resources out there. Just be careful to steer clear of the partisans. However much I disagree with them, the shut-up-and-calculate people give the best overall picture, even when describing a particular interpretation.
      - zanecodes 5y ago
        Is it? For one reason or another I thought there was a distinction, although reading back what I wrote a second time I can't figure out what it would be. It's interesting to consider the implications of this line of thinking though; it seems like it would imply that causally-disconnected regions of spacetime (i.e. things outside of our light cone) are forever in a superposition of all possible quantum states, from our perspective, among other things.
- samatman 5y ago
  > It's not [currently] possible to distinguish between many worlds or any other interpretation so [unless or until that changes] it will never will be confirmed (nor will the Copenhagen interpretation). Seems like the minimum editorializing to make your statement science and not religion, no?

This only works if the many-worlds-interpretation is true, which has not been confirmed

nkrisc 5y ago

And if we’re in one of the universes where it is true.

ravi-delia 5y ago
This is a common misconception, so if you're just joking I'll prepare myself to be wooshed in the hopes it helps someone else reading this. There is a concept of many universes which permits slightly differing laws of physics (actually different fundamental constants), but many worlds isn't that one. Many Worlds just says that quantum wavefunctions don't collapse. It doesn't posit any "universe" that the Copenhagen interpretation doesn't allow, it just lets them exist side by side.
- nkrisc 5y ago
  It was a joke but your comment was interesting nonetheless.
  - medstrom 5y ago
    You sound like you'd be interested in Max Tegmark's "Our Mathematical Universe". There are probably multiple levels of multiverses, and in our local "stack" we have 4, where the Many Worlds mechanism is sitting on level 3. Some don't have this level 3, but may have fewer or more levels, using mechanisms foreign to this multiverse, depending on their laws of physics.

beecafe 5y ago

It's not possible to distinguish between many worlds or any other interpretation, so it will never will be confirmed (nor will the Copenhagen interpretation). The only ones that can be confirmed are the "objective collapse" theories, as they produce very slightly different predictions than normal QM.

ravi-delia 5y ago
I think it's fair to say that if we ever put a full human being into superposition with a large enough environment for decoherence to happen within the experiment, many worlds is all but confirmed.
- zanecodes 5y ago
  This relates to an interpretation of QM that I have not personally found much reading material on, the idea that wavefunction collapse is actually just entanglement; that is to say that as soon as a system in a superposition interacts with the outside universe, the outside universe becomes entangled with the system, thus putting the entire universe into a superposition where both outcomes are observed.
  - ravi-delia 5y ago
    That's precisely Many Worlds! The process you describe is a pretty close match for what's called decoherence. Perhaps you'll have more luck with those search terms, there are quite a few really good resources out there. Just be careful to steer clear of the partisans. However much I disagree with them, the shut-up-and-calculate people give the best overall picture, even when describing a particular interpretation.
    - zanecodes 5y ago
      Is it? For one reason or another I thought there was a distinction, although reading back what I wrote a second time I can't figure out what it would be. It's interesting to consider the implications of this line of thinking though; it seems like it would imply that causally-disconnected regions of spacetime (i.e. things outside of our light cone) are forever in a superposition of all possible quantum states, from our perspective, among other things.
samatman 5y ago
> It's not [currently] possible to distinguish between many worlds or any other interpretation so [unless or until that changes] it will never will be confirmed (nor will the Copenhagen interpretation). Seems like the minimum editorializing to make your statement science and not religion, no?