Thanks, was very informative and interesting. Surprisingly I was able to follow, even without a computer background. Only wish that the discussion phase was longer and shared with the public with more follow up. Thanks again
It seems to me that every time a (macroscopic) deck of cards is shuffled and dealt, a realization is made and other possible realizations “collapse”. Symmetries allow me to know things about other hands, given that, and all that can collapse, or not, as well. Proof by contradiction has a different, possibly related, and similarly disquieting symmetries among multiple indiscernibly-connected-possible-existence-until-you-look thing going on for the “observer”. What is actually “real” about a probability distribution of events like the dealt hand, seems to me to not be a totally unrelated question to superposition of other physical states at any scale. I am a scientist and am familiar with the formalism, explanatory dogma, and the usual discussion regarding this sort of thing. But there are many examples that often leave me thinking that maybe what the real problem is, is that i just don’t understand what a probability is in terms of “reality”. I know what the phenomenological model of a probability is with respect to a measure over a sigma algebra and counting and so-on. So I know how to play the game but if I pause, then I am just not so sure about what a probability is in any form. My intuition is not very happy, teleologically speaking at least. So just ignoring it works fine on a day to day basis at work etc, but you raise a question here by, as is commonly enough done with certain kinds of decoherence discussions, talking about macroscopic observations. Like dealt hands of shuffled cards without replacement, say.
@46:00 that "Babak" guy missed the whole point of the "thought rotation" gedankenexperiment. If "someone" could easily rotate your consciousness they'd be a god. So it would not only rule out the von-Neumann version of Copenhagen, it would confirm the existence of gods. Now, this is not to say such gods do not exist, but if they did where are they? I'm being facetious, but semi-serious there too. Point is, it is not easy to test MWI, period, at least not this way by comparing macroscopic superposition, and if all we can test is small scale superpositions we are not doing much, because they'd be compatible with almost all versions of QM interpretations, in fact they have to be, up to whatever limits the model says collapse or subjective awareness in no-collapse theories, occurs. For me, there is no collapse, there are only indelible records that tell us limits on what states were once in superposition, so it is a version of limited sum-over-histories: not all Feynman--Hibbs histories have to be actualized, only some very large number. But in the SOH formalism you have to pretend all histories occur because you have no information to say otherwise, like rolling a dice: you only need a few hundred to confirm the die is fair.
Thanks, was very informative and interesting. Surprisingly I was able to follow, even without a computer background. Only wish that the discussion phase was longer and shared with the public with more follow up. Thanks again
Extremely intriguing post! Thank you! Subscribed.
It seems to me that every time a (macroscopic) deck of cards is shuffled and dealt, a realization is made and other possible realizations “collapse”. Symmetries allow me to know things about other hands, given that, and all that can collapse, or not, as well. Proof by contradiction has a different, possibly related, and similarly disquieting symmetries among multiple indiscernibly-connected-possible-existence-until-you-look thing going on for the “observer”. What is actually “real” about a probability distribution of events like the dealt hand, seems to me to not be a totally unrelated question to superposition of other physical states at any scale. I am a scientist and am familiar with the formalism, explanatory dogma, and the usual discussion regarding this sort of thing. But there are many examples that often leave me thinking that maybe what the real problem is, is that i just don’t understand what a probability is in terms of “reality”. I know what the phenomenological model of a probability is with respect to a measure over a sigma algebra and counting and so-on. So I know how to play the game but if I pause, then I am just not so sure about what a probability is in any form. My intuition is not very happy, teleologically speaking at least. So just ignoring it works fine on a day to day basis at work etc, but you raise a question here by, as is commonly enough done with certain kinds of decoherence discussions, talking about macroscopic observations. Like dealt hands of shuffled cards without replacement, say.
@46:00 that "Babak" guy missed the whole point of the "thought rotation" gedankenexperiment. If "someone" could easily rotate your consciousness they'd be a god. So it would not only rule out the von-Neumann version of Copenhagen, it would confirm the existence of gods. Now, this is not to say such gods do not exist, but if they did where are they? I'm being facetious, but semi-serious there too. Point is, it is not easy to test MWI, period, at least not this way by comparing macroscopic superposition, and if all we can test is small scale superpositions we are not doing much, because they'd be compatible with almost all versions of QM interpretations, in fact they have to be, up to whatever limits the model says collapse or subjective awareness in no-collapse theories, occurs.
For me, there is no collapse, there are only indelible records that tell us limits on what states were once in superposition, so it is a version of limited sum-over-histories: not all Feynman--Hibbs histories have to be actualized, only some very large number. But in the SOH formalism you have to pretend all histories occur because you have no information to say otherwise, like rolling a dice: you only need a few hundred to confirm the die is fair.