2 ms·
> the information is actually still preserved across the totality of the worlds That may be correct if the “totality of the worlds” means one single “world” de
by kgwgk 5y ago
> the information is actually still preserved across the totality of the worlds
That may be correct if the “totality of the worlds” means one single “world” described by a wave function evolving unitarily - corresponding to what you call information. This “information” cannot be destroyed but it cannot be created either. It will always be the same “information” that was already there at the beginning of time.
What is unclear is the “many worlds” part. How are they defined?
- tsimionescu 5y ago> It will always be the same “information” that was already there at the beginning of time. Yes, absolutely. Though it's worth noting that QM does allow for the void to have random fluctuations that are not caused by anything else, but that can interact with the existing system. > What is unclear is the “many worlds” part. How are they defined? There are several ways from what I've read. I personally don't think MWI really solves any problems, or that it is a good description of nature, so I haven't taken too much time to remember exactly how they do it.
- kgwgk 5y ago> Though it's worth noting that QM does allow for the void to have random fluctuations that are not caused by anything else, but that can interact with the existing system. The random fluctuations are random only becase we observe whether they happened or not. If you consider QM to be just the deterministic evolution of a pure quantum state there is nothing random about them. You would say that the "information" about those "random fluctuations" was always there. > I personally don't think MWI really solves any problems I think we agree on that.