- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Wei Dai <weidai.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 19:02:06 -0800

On Tue, Feb 24, 1998 at 07:01:59PM +1000, Mitchell Porter wrote:

*> *Where*?
*

*>
*

*> Please show me in what sense even a single particle is part of the UWF.
*

The UWF is supposed to be a wave in the configuration space of some system

of particles, right? Some configurations of this system contain structures

that can be interpreted as us. We are part of the UWF in the sense that it

assigns a nonzero amplitude to those configurations.

Instead of trying to defend the MWI, maybe I should give my own

interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is part of my version of the

AUH. Recall that my version of the AUH says all binary strings exist, each

with a measure equal to its universal a priori probability. The universal

a priori probability of a string s is the probability that a UTM with a

random input tape will produce s as the output.

Now consider a TM Q. Q contains hard-coded boundary conditions for a wave

function PSI. The first part of the input to Q is a time parameter t, the

second part is a region parameter r, the third part is a precision

parameter p, and the rest of the input is used as a random string. Q

selects a configuration c of the system of particles with probability P(c)

= PSI*(c,t) PSI(c,t) dc, and then outputs the positions (with precision p)

of particles in r.

Now we're part of PSI in the sense that we (or rather strings that

represent us) appear as the output of Q given certain inputs. Therefore Q

contributes to the universal a priori probability of those strings, and

PSI enters into the probability computations under AUH through these

contributions.

Received on Wed Feb 25 1998 - 19:03:08 PST

Date: Wed, 25 Feb 1998 19:02:06 -0800

On Tue, Feb 24, 1998 at 07:01:59PM +1000, Mitchell Porter wrote:

The UWF is supposed to be a wave in the configuration space of some system

of particles, right? Some configurations of this system contain structures

that can be interpreted as us. We are part of the UWF in the sense that it

assigns a nonzero amplitude to those configurations.

Instead of trying to defend the MWI, maybe I should give my own

interpretation of quantum mechanics, which is part of my version of the

AUH. Recall that my version of the AUH says all binary strings exist, each

with a measure equal to its universal a priori probability. The universal

a priori probability of a string s is the probability that a UTM with a

random input tape will produce s as the output.

Now consider a TM Q. Q contains hard-coded boundary conditions for a wave

function PSI. The first part of the input to Q is a time parameter t, the

second part is a region parameter r, the third part is a precision

parameter p, and the rest of the input is used as a random string. Q

selects a configuration c of the system of particles with probability P(c)

= PSI*(c,t) PSI(c,t) dc, and then outputs the positions (with precision p)

of particles in r.

Now we're part of PSI in the sense that we (or rather strings that

represent us) appear as the output of Q given certain inputs. Therefore Q

contributes to the universal a priori probability of those strings, and

PSI enters into the probability computations under AUH through these

contributions.

Received on Wed Feb 25 1998 - 19:03:08 PST

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:06 PST
*