4 ms·

The wavefunction is deterministic. If you take the MWI as the most straight forward interpretation of the math, then the universe if fundamentally deterministic

The wavefunction is deterministic. If you take the MWI as the most straight forward interpretation of the math, then the universe if fundamentally deterministic. Probability on a physics level would represent our ignorance of the other branches.

layer8 3y ago
Or it would characterize the futures of the current branch.
kubanczyk 3y ago
> then the universe if fundamentally deterministic s/universe/multiverse/ And a universe is fundamentally probabilistic.
jounker 3y ago
What i remember from my PDE class was a lecture which involved solving the wave equation for a particular bounded case and, with a slight transformation, the professor showing that the normal distribution was embedded in that solution.
golol 3y ago
I don't think you can reason like this. As far as I understodod, standard quantum mechanics does not make any statement about how the measuring process and the collapse of the wavefunvtion happens. So while the waveform evolves deterministically, you can only ever apply this model when you are in the position of performing measurements on some quantum mechanical system. As I understand, Quantum mechanics is not meant to also model you together with the experiment as a wavefunction, because the act of you performing a measurement does not have a definition in the form of the wavefunction interacting with itself somehow. So without extensions to QM, you should not reason with universal deterministic waveforms.
- canjobear 3y ago
  > the act of you performing a measurement does not have a definition in the form of the wavefunction interacting with itself somehow Performing a measurement just means you become entangled with the thing you’re measuring. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence
  - pixl97 3y ago
    And the thing you're measuring is already entangled with the messy universe around it...
  - golol 3y ago
    I didn't know that quantum decoherence tackles the measurement problem. It seems like quite an intuitive explanation and does preserve a global wavefunction. Perhaps this doesn't quite count this as "standard quantum mechanics though. As I understand there is a very tight-knit theory consisting of a mathematical model (Measurements are self adjoint operators on a Hilbert spaces, unitary evolution given bx the hamiltonian, states are unit vectors or POVMs.) together with a physical interpretation that amazingly fits the observations. This + quantum decoherence seems more in the realm of mathematical theory with a nice interpretation and some experimental evidence.
- goatlover 3y ago
  The argument is that the experimental device and you are made up of the same quantum stuff that you're measuring, so there's no reason to suppose a collapse of the wavefunction or that the wavefunction doesn't apply to the entire experimental setup. Just saying if MWI is the correct interpretation.
williamcotton 3y ago
Simplicity of mathematical models at the expense of falsification… who needs science, anyways?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

layer8 3y ago

Or it would characterize the futures of the current branch.

kubanczyk 3y ago

> then the universe if fundamentally deterministic s/universe/multiverse/ And a universe is fundamentally probabilistic.

jounker 3y ago

What i remember from my PDE class was a lecture which involved solving the wave equation for a particular bounded case and, with a slight transformation, the professor showing that the normal distribution was embedded in that solution.

golol 3y ago

I don't think you can reason like this. As far as I understodod, standard quantum mechanics does not make any statement about how the measuring process and the collapse of the wavefunvtion happens. So while the waveform evolves deterministically, you can only ever apply this model when you are in the position of performing measurements on some quantum mechanical system. As I understand, Quantum mechanics is not meant to also model you together with the experiment as a wavefunction, because the act of you performing a measurement does not have a definition in the form of the wavefunction interacting with itself somehow. So without extensions to QM, you should not reason with universal deterministic waveforms.

canjobear 3y ago
> the act of you performing a measurement does not have a definition in the form of the wavefunction interacting with itself somehow Performing a measurement just means you become entangled with the thing you’re measuring. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence
- pixl97 3y ago
  And the thing you're measuring is already entangled with the messy universe around it...
- golol 3y ago
  I didn't know that quantum decoherence tackles the measurement problem. It seems like quite an intuitive explanation and does preserve a global wavefunction. Perhaps this doesn't quite count this as "standard quantum mechanics though. As I understand there is a very tight-knit theory consisting of a mathematical model (Measurements are self adjoint operators on a Hilbert spaces, unitary evolution given bx the hamiltonian, states are unit vectors or POVMs.) together with a physical interpretation that amazingly fits the observations. This + quantum decoherence seems more in the realm of mathematical theory with a nice interpretation and some experimental evidence.
goatlover 3y ago
The argument is that the experimental device and you are made up of the same quantum stuff that you're measuring, so there's no reason to suppose a collapse of the wavefunction or that the wavefunction doesn't apply to the entire experimental setup. Just saying if MWI is the correct interpretation.

williamcotton 3y ago

Simplicity of mathematical models at the expense of falsification… who needs science, anyways?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]