Talk:Many-minds interpretation
|
|
However Everett's work was incomplete. He was attempting to show how the seemingly non-random "real world" leads from the indeterminancy of the quantum world, but he left this last crutial step unexplained. You see only one measure, and no hint of these other values or other "yous" measuring the other values, how is this to be explained?
The many-worlds interpretation assumes that the states of an observer correspond to separate world states, so each should be unaware of the others. This may be considered a problem, since it predict entities that can't be verified by observation, but is not generally considered an incompleteness that needs to be patched. Also, the many-worlds explains how the indeterminancy of experiments leads from determinate physical laws, not the other way around. As such, I think it is best to remove this entire paragraph. I've also removed:
This interpretation thus has the added advantage of being "local" in the general relativity sense of the term, because all of the decision making takes place in your mind.
because Everett's interpretation is local in the general relativistic sense, having abandoned collapse, which is the only non-local feature of other interpretations.
This is not correct. It is the quantum state itself which is nonlocal (without any dynamical nonlocality, such as spurious action at a distance).
In general, I think the text here is fairly suspect and could do with revision by someone more familiar with what this interpretation is supposed to be about. In particular, I think this page has overstated its benefits and understated its flaws, given the mistakes above and that one of its authors has since disavowed it.
The Everett interpretation is now very popular, since it is the only dynamically consistent quantum theory.
More random?
Isn't this a bit misleading:
For the majority of time, systems will evolve according to the Schrödinger equation, evolving in a way that makes the system more and more indeterminate, becoming more "random" in the sense that its physical qualities can take on a greater range of values.
The time evolution of a state governed by the Schrödinger equation is totally deterministic. The last half sentence is more in sync facts (in the sense that...). Volunteers for a better formulation?
Pjacobi 22:18, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)
- The correct statement I think would be that for all time, systems will evolve according to a Master equation such as the Lindblad equation. Many-worlds is a rather improvished form of this.--CSTAR 22:48, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Yuck. This article is need of major debogusification. What the hell does this mean?
- The central problem of quantum theory is that it involves an unexplained duality in nature. For the majority of time, systems will evolve according to the Schrödinger equation, evolving in a way that makes the system more and more indeterminate, becoming more "random" in the sense that its physical qualities can take on a greater range of values.
- Well I assume this means that vonNeumann entropy increases.--CSTAR 22:57, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)