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

From: Brent Meeker <meekerdb.domain.name.hidden>

Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 20:55:26 -0700

Russell Standish wrote:

*> On Sun, Aug 21, 2005 at 06:12:54PM -0700, Brent Meeker wrote:
*

*>
*

*>>I've haven't read your derivation, but I've read quant-ph/0505059 by VAn
*

*>>Esch which is a proof that the Born Rule is independent of Everett's MWI
*

*>>and cannot be derived from it.
*

*>>
*

*>>How do you avoid Van Esch's counter example.
*

*>>
*

*>>Brent Meeker
*

*>
*

*>
*

*> I'm not sure its that relevant - I don't derive the Born rule from
*

*> Everett MWI per se, but rather from assumption that 1st person
*

*> experience should appear as the result of an evolutionary process. I
*

*> actually use Lewontin's criteria for evolution - I have an improved
*

*> explanation of this in appendix B of my draft book, although
*

*> technically it is identical to the FoPL paper.
*

*>
*

*> Another way of viewing this topic is that the Multiverse (or MWI) is a
*

*> 3rd person description, whereas the Born rule is a 1st person
*

*> property. So it is not surprising that the two are independent.
*

*>
*

*> Looking at the paper, Esch proposes an alternative projection postulate
*

*> that weights all possible alternatives equally, ie it is equivalent to
*

*> the usual PP provided that the state vector is restricted to the set
*

*> of vectors \psi such that
*

*>
*

*> <\psi|P_i|\psi> = 1/n_\psi or 0.
*

*>
*

*> Let \psi' = \sum_i P_i\phi, for any vector \phi, and let
*

*> \psi=\psi'/\sqrt{<\psi',\psi>}, so this set if not empty.
*

*>
*

*>
*

*> This is a kind of all or nothing approach to \psi - \psi contains only
*

*> information about whether x_i is possible, or impossible, but doesn't
*

*> contain any shades of gray. It is saying, in other words, that White
*

*> Rabbit universes are just as likely as well ordered one - something
*

*> that contradicts the previous section on the white rabbit problem.
*

*>
*

*> Instead, I assume that \psi does contain information about the
*

*> liklihood of each branch,
*

That would be one form of the additional postulate which Van Esch says is

necessary to derive the Born Rule - so there is no conflict with his result.

Brent Meeker

Received on Sun Aug 21 2005 - 23:57:00 PDT

Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 20:55:26 -0700

Russell Standish wrote:

That would be one form of the additional postulate which Van Esch says is

necessary to derive the Born Rule - so there is no conflict with his result.

Brent Meeker

Received on Sun Aug 21 2005 - 23:57:00 PDT

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: Fri Feb 16 2018 - 13:20:11 PST
*