Re: Numbers

From: Bruno Marchal <marchal.domain.name.hidden>
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.

Bruno

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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 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