« Philosophers' Carnival VII Plug | Main | Philosophers' Carnival VII »
December 30, 2004
Quantum News
Someone I know sent me a link to this piece on some new theorem someone proved in quantum theory. Is anyone who knows this stuff able to translate it into simpler language and explain if there are any metaphysical results of this? In particular, is this supposed to show something about the various interpretations of quantum mechanics (and if so what?) or is it simply something new about the equations themselves, and then what does that amount to in terms of the interpretations? Or is this, as I suspect is well within the realm of possibility, someone writing about something they know nothing about and making a mountain out of a molehill?
Posted by Jeremy at December 30, 2004 7:17 PM
Comments
I'm not a physicist but I went back and read Zurek's original article and googled up some comment from the newsgroups(sci.physics*) which are the best place to keep track of physics I've found.
Essentially Zurek's theories are considered to be a variation on the Many World's interpretation of quantum mechanics. The idea that there are an infinite number of worlds(universes) that exist as possibility until a measurement is made.
What Zurek and his mates seem to be doing is calcutating (using a device called "pointer states") how these many worlds actually result in the observed one. This is where the evolutionary theory comes in.
Essentially the recent paper seems to suggest that the observer represents one particular possibilty as against a large number of possiblities from the environment. These possiblities 'compete' resulting in an objective reality because the observer(subject) is only one amongst many of the possiblities. Hence the observers subjectivity is overwhlemed.
Personally I think that the use of terms such as 'evolution' and 'competition' may be a bit deceptive in this context since they imply a finite time scale where choices eventuate. In quantum mechanics the choices are instantaneous. So what's involved is competing probabilities - the bookies odds rather than the actual fitness of the horses, perhaps.
But like I said I'm no expert and I'd value any correction to my own misunderstandings.
Posted by: kyan gadac at January 3, 2005 11:28 PM
POSSIBILITIES????
BOOK--WRITTEN 1999--COPY RIGHT---1999
PLAY APPEARS ON STAGE--2005
(4) POINTS---EXACTLY IN BOTH WORKS:
1. JUDAS SEEKS APPEAL TO ENTER HEAVEN-GRANTED HEARING
2. HEARING TAKES PLACE IN A COURTROOM
3.ACTION TAKES PLACE AT THE PRESENT TIME
4. BOTH WORKS--JESUS GRANTS JUDAS FORGIVENESS!!
ASSUME PLAY AUTHOR "DID NOT READ BOOK"--
WHAT IS THE POSIBILITY OR PROBABILITY OF THAT HAPPENING--SINCE IT IS SUCH A WAY OUT THEME??
MILLION TO MORE ---LESS---MORE
CAN A NUMBER BE PLACED ON THE CALCULATION.
THANKS FOR ANY HELP!!
MICHAEL PORTO
Posted by: MICHAEL PORTO at March 15, 2005 9:10 AM
Yawn! I have been hunting through the Internet for QM for nonnerds but I believe none of these QM gods have succeeded in simplifying their theories. But viola here is a revelation. I have succeeded in factorisating RSA129 in 6+ second using an old Dell Dimension 2300 at 1.8 GHz! So why do I need to bother with QM factorisaton anymore. Not unless a QM physicists could convince me there is more to it than factorisation? Please visit
http://home.pacific.net.sg/~topchoice
Best regards
HuenYK
Posted by: Huen Y.K. at April 23, 2006 9:35 PM