[SEQ RERUN] Spooky Action at a Distance

MinibearRex

Today's post, Spooky Action at a Distance: The No-Communication Theorem was originally published on 05 May 2008. A summary (taken from the LW wiki):

As Einstein argued long ago, the quantum physics of his era - that is, the single-global-world interpretation of quantum physics, in which experiments have single unique random results - violates Special Relativity; it imposes a preferred space of simultaneity and requires a mysterious influence to be transmitted faster than light; which mysterious influence can never be used to transmit any useful information. Getting rid of the single global world dispels this mystery and puts everything back to normal again.

Discuss the post here (rather than in the comments to the original post).

This post is part of the Rerunning the Sequences series, where we'll be going through Eliezer Yudkowsky's old posts in order so that people who are interested can (re-)read and discuss them. The previous post was Bell's Theorem: No EPR "Reality", and you can use the sequence_reruns tag or rss feed to follow the rest of the series.

Sequence reruns are a community-driven effort. You can participate by re-reading the sequence post, discussing it here, posting the next day's sequence reruns post, or summarizing forthcoming articles on the wiki. Go here for more details, or to have meta discussions about the Rerunning the Sequences series.

Today's post, Spooky Action at a Distance: The No-Communication Theorem was originally published on 05 May 2008. A summary (taken from the LW wiki):

As Einstein argued long ago, the quantum physics of his era - that is, the single-global-world interpretation of quantum physics, in which experiments have single unique random results - violates Special Relativity; it imposes a preferred space of simultaneity and requires a mysterious influence to be transmitted faster than light; which mysterious influence can never be used to transmit any useful information. Getting rid of the single global world dispels this mystery and puts everything back to normal again.

That's a matter of taste, since there is no way to resolve this except on aesthetic grounds.

MWI is not empirically equivalent to all other interpretations of QM. It makes different predictions from the Copenhagen interpretation, for instance. Even if this were not the case, we distinguish between empirically equivalent theories on scientific grounds all the time. Neo-Lorentzian theory is empirically equivalent to the special theory of relativity, but I think (and most scientists agree) that there are good non-empirical grounds for preferring the special theory. You may call these criteria "aesthetic", but that doesn't alter the fact that they are part of the standard explanatory toolbox of physics.

Or else, dispense with interpretations and do physics instead.

Part of doing physics is figuring out the actual structure of our universe, and interpreting QFT is crucial to that task. Physics isn't just about doing calculations.

Part of doing physics is figuring out the actual structure of our universe, and interpreting QFT is crucial to that task. Physics isn't just about doing calculations.

I agree with you, but I'd like to note the irony of this against your username.

2Shmi14y

This particular dead horse has been pounded into dust already, so I'll disengage.

6

[SEQ RERUN] Spooky Action at a Distance

6

6

6

[SEQ RERUN] Spooky Action at a Distance

6

6