Mitchell_Porter comments on The Contrarian Status Catch-22 - Less Wrong

49 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 19 December 2009 10:40PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (99)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 20 December 2009 05:40:54PM 4 points [-]

We have seemingly "fundamentally unpredictable" events at exactly the point where ordinary quantum mechanics predicts the world ought to split, and there's no way to have those events take place in a single global world without violating Special Relativity. Leaving aside other considerations such as having the laws of physical causality be local in the configuration space, the interpretation of the above evidence is obvious and there's simply no reason whatsoever at all to privilege the hypothesis of a single world. I call it for many-worlds. It's over.

Comment author: Mitchell_Porter 21 December 2009 02:49:47AM 1 point [-]

Ordinary quantum mechanics does not predict that the world splits, no more than does ordinary probability theory.

The zigzag interpretations are entirely relativistic, since the essence of a zigzag interpretation is that you have ordinary space-time with local causality, but you have causal chains that run backwards as well as forwards in time, and a zigzag in time is what gives you unusual spacelike correlation.

A "quantum causal history" (see previous link) is something like a cellular automaton with no fixed grid structure, no universal time, and locally evolving Hilbert spaces which fuse and join.

These three ideas - many worlds, zigzag, QCH - all define research programs rather than completed theories. The latter two are single-world theories and they even approximate locality in spacetime (and not just "in configuration space"). You should think about them some time.