The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics · HackerPapers discussions

The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics — mentioned by ars

Fri, 30 Nov 2018 03:04:56 GMT

Did you actually read https://arxiv.org/pdf/1105.3796.pdf ? As best as I can tell the multiverse he describes is not the type with varying laws of physics. He's using yet another definition of the term.

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics — mentioned by jamesrcole

Fri, 30 Nov 2018 01:41:12 GMT

> The multiverse and the many worlds have nothing to do with each other. Some examples "The theory is also referred to as MWI, the relative state formulation, ... multiverse theory or just many-worlds. [...] MWI is one of many multiverse hypotheses in physics and philosophy." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation For those who don't know, the Everett mentioned in the following is the person who came up with the Many Worlds view. "The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics", by Raphael Boussoa and Leonard Susskind Abstract: We argue that the many-worlds of quantum…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics — mentioned by monktastic1

Fri, 21 Sep 2018 02:57:57 GMT

I just mean like this: http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2014/06/30/why-the-... "We wouldn’t think of our pre-measurement state (1) as describing two different worlds; it’s just one world, in which the particle is in a superposition. But (2) has two worlds in it. The difference is that we can imagine undoing the superposition in (1) by carefully manipulating the particle, but in (2) the difference between the two branches has diffused into the environment and is lost there forever." (State 1 is when the particle is in a superposition by itself and state 2 is when it's entangled with a…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics — mentioned by conistonwater

Sat, 21 Jan 2017 23:10:37 GMT

I see your point, but Wikipedia isn't super reliable on the more unsettled parts of theoretical physics. For example, a cursory search gives me https://www.technologyreview.com/s/424073/multiverse-many-wo..., but while I can't judge https://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3796 on my own, it does appear the idea is new, and for something as new, and as vaguely defined as the multiverse (MWI itself is quite old), I probably should ask for more than a Wikipedia summary. I mean, it's fine by me if there's some kind of disagreement within physics, but to assume they are the same thing would require more, no?

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics — mentioned by JonnieCache

Wed, 06 Jul 2011 18:37:07 GMT

If you want some really wacky stuff, try this: The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics - Leonard Susskind and Raphael Bousso http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3796 By the way, this ain't your daddy's multiverse. This is a whole new and extended multiverse theory which says that the multiple universes used to explain tuning of constants and the multiple universes used to explain quantum decoherence are THE SAME THING! Then, for balance read this guy who thinks they're on crack: http://motls.blogspot.com/2011/05/bousso-susskind-hypermulti...

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics — mentioned by rms

Fri, 03 Jun 2011 08:44:30 GMT

the real paper at http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3796

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.