= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Luke_A_Somers comments on Decoherence is Simple - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (57)
I have been working with decoherence in experimental physics. It confuses me that you want to use it as a synonym for the Many-Worlds theory.
MWI is the supposition that there is nothing else to the fundamental laws of nature except QM. Decoherence is the main tricky point in the bridge between QM and our subjective experiences.
With decoherence, a collapse postulate is superfluous. With decoherence, you don't need a Bohmian 'real thing' or whatever he calls it. QM is simply the way things are. You can stick with it, and MWI follows directly.
The collapse postulate is just a visualization, just like the MWI is.The Born projection rule is the only "real" thing, and it persists through MWI or any other "I". So no, the MWI does not follow directly, unless you strip it of all ontological meaning.