3 ms·

I disagree that it is "the best explanation we have". It's a nice theory, but like all theories in quantum foundations / interpretations of quantum mechanics, i

I disagree that it is "the best explanation we have". It's a nice theory, but like all theories in quantum foundations / interpretations of quantum mechanics, it is (at least currently) unfalsifiable. I didn't "assume" hype, I hypothesized it based on the evidence before me: There is nothing in Google's paper that deals with interpretations of quantum mechanics. This only appears in the blog post, with no evidence given. And there is nothing google is doing with it's quantum chip that would discriminate between interpretations of QM, so it is simply false that "It lends credence to ... parallel universes" over another interpretation.

hshshshshsh 2y ago
From what I understand, David Deutsch invented the idea of quantum computer as a way to test Parallel Universes. And later people went on and built the quantum computer. Are you saying that the implementation of a quantum computer does not require any kind of assumption on computations being run in parallel universes?
- Vecr 2y ago
  It's just not how it works. All this type of quantum computer can do is test some of the more dubious objective collapse theories. Those are wrong anyway, so all theories that are still in the running agree.
- lanternfish 2y ago
  In short, no.
- kelnos 2y ago
  That's right, it doesn't. The implementation of a quantum computer does not prove or disprove the existence of parallel universes.