Re: Numbers

From: Bruno Marchal <>
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 12:32:43 +0200

Le 04-avr.-06, à 19:31, Brent Meeker a écrit :

> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>> Le 01-avr.-06, à 19:18, 1Z a écrit :
> ...
>> If you believe in absolute QM (or just assume absolute QM I eman QM
>> without wave collapse) then, obviously, observers are subject to the
>> SWE, and are multiplied or differentiated continuously.
> It may be so, but not obviously. It's part of the Hilbert space
> representation
> of QM, but alternatives such as Bohm's show that it is not necessary.

OK, I should have been more precise. By "pure QM" I mean QM without
collapse, and without any addition to the SWE (except comp). Bohm is
not QM, for me, it is QM + a guiding Potential (capable of forcing
"particles" to select a universe). It is a *different* theory (which,
btw, seems to me to need big and ad hoc changes to remain viable in the
relativistic case, but that is not the point here).

I don't know which theory is correct of course.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at
Received on Wed Apr 05 2006 - 06:34:00 PDT

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