Re: Maudlin's argument

From: 1Z <peterdjones.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 06:51:37 -0700

Russell Standish wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 07:03:18AM -0000, marc.geddes.domain.name.hidden wrote:
> >
> > Also see my reply to Russell below:
> >
> >
> > >Russell Standish
> > >
> > >The Multiverse is defined as the set of consistent histories described
> > >by the Schroedinger equation. I make the identification that a quantum
> > >state is an observer moment, and the set of consistent quantum
> > >histories is the set of observer histories. As such all observer
> > >moments are in the Multiverse.
> > >
> > >But I appreciate this is not a widely held interpretation...
> >
> >
> > Indeed so. And there's a good reason why it isn't a widely held
> > interpretation, as J.barbour explained in 'The End Of Time'. In order
> > to define 'the Multiverse' in terms of QM one needs a *static*
> > wave-function solution for the entire universe (one which doesn't
> > change) , whereas conventional QM solutions to real world problems are
> > *dynamic* wave-function solutions (wave functions which evolve with
> > time). No one has yet succeeded in demonstrating a static
> > wave-function solution for the entire universe.
> >
>
> I haven't read Barbour's book, but if that is what he is saying, he
> would be wrong. Consider a universe of a single electron living in a
> potential well

Where does the potential well come from?

>V(x)=|x|^2, x\in R^3. There is a well defined solution
> \psi(t,x) = \sum_j <\psu_0|j><j| exp(-iE_j t) given the initial
> condition \psi_0.
>
> The function \psi: R x R^3 -> C is a static (time independent)
> mathematical object (I wrote it the mathematicians write to emphasize
> this point). Why wouldn't you identify this with the Multiverse of
> that electron?
>
> Now I am aware that several people (Hawking included I gather) have
> proposed various "wave functions of the universe", which tend to be
> solutions of the Wheeler de Witt equation, which is a time independent
> equation. However, I'm not so interested in following that literature.

That is roughly the approach Barbour takes.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Sun Oct 15 2006 - 09:51:55 PDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:12 PST