HackerPapers

arXiv:1405.7577quant-ph

Self-Locating Uncertainty and the Origin of Probability in Everettian Quantum Mechanics

Charles T. Sebens, Sean M. Carroll

Abstract

A longstanding issue in attempts to understand the Everett (Many-Worlds) approach to quantum mechanics is the origin of the Born rule: why is the probability given by the square of the amplitude? Following Vaidman, we note that observers are in a position of self-locating uncertainty during the period between the branches of the wave function splitting via decoherence and the observer registering the outcome of the measurement. In this period it is tempting to regard each branch as equiprobable, but we argue that the temptation should be resisted. Applying lessons from this analysis, we demonstrate (using methods similar to those of Zurek's envariance-based derivation) that the Born rule is the uniquely rational way of apportioning credence in Everettian quantum mechanics. In doing so, we rely on a single key principle: changes purely to the environment do not affect the probabilities one ought to assign to measurement outcomes in a local subsystem. We arrive at a method for assigning probabilities in cases that involve both classical and quantum self-locating uncertainty. This method provides unique answers to quantum Sleeping Beauty problems, as well as a well-defined procedure for calculating probabilities in quantum cosmological multiverses with multiple similar observers.

arXiv comments
44 pages, 2 figures
Journal reference
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, Volume 69, Issue 1, March 2018, Pages 25-74
DOI
doi:10.1093/bjps/axw004
Subjects
quant-phQuantum Physics gr-qcGeneral Relativity and Quantum Cosmology

On Hacker News

Linked by 3 identifiable commenters in 3 comments across 3 threads, from Jun 2014 to Sep 2019.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments3 threads

    • Here's a blog post I wrote about this recently: http://blog.rongarret.info/2019/07/the-trouble-with-many-wor... The TL;DR is that the critics are correct. Deriving the Born rule begs the question because it makes an unjustified assumption (branching indifference) and also…

      lisperView on HNParent context

    • Being able to count worlds in the manner you describe is apparently not easy to justify. If I recall correctly, this is actually a pretty thorny epistemological problem with the theory. IIRC the current response among Many Worlds people is that either (1) it doesn't really…

      Jweb_GuruView on HNParent context

    • I agree that progress in experimental abilities and QC is really forcing physicists to think carefully about what QM means. In fact the month of May saw three papers by major physicists about these deeper issues in QM [1,2,3] In my own humble capacity as a graduate student in…

      abdullahkhalidsView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.