Re: "Naive Realism" and QM

From: Russell Standish <r.standish.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:45:51 +1000

On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 04:30:21PM -0700, Lee Corbin wrote:
>
> Your point about the squared modulus is well taken. Just why
> *probabilities* emerge from squared amplitudes, I couldn't
> tell you. I'm not sure that anyone knows---as I recall, many
> this is related to the basis problem of the MWI (though
> Deutsch and others say that decoherence takes care of
> everything, though).
>
> Lee

This is simply the Born rule - I give a derivation of the Born rule in
my paper "Why Occam's Razor". Some other people on this list have
asserted prior derivations of the Born rule also, which wouldn't
overly surprise me as its not that mysterious.

Cheers

-- 
*PS: A number of people ask me about the attachment to my email, which
is of type "application/pgp-signature". Don't worry, it is not a
virus. It is an electronic signature, that may be used to verify this
email came from me if you have PGP or GPG installed. Otherwise, you
may safely ignore this attachment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A/Prof Russell Standish                  Phone 8308 3119 (mobile)
Mathematics                         	       0425 253119 (")
UNSW SYDNEY 2052         	         R.Standish.domain.name.hidden             
Australia                                http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
            International prefix  +612, Interstate prefix 02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Wed Aug 17 2005 - 20:15:53 PDT