Bob5 comments on Decoherence is Falsifiable and Testable - Less Wrong

20 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 07 May 2008 07:54AM

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

Comments (34)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Bob5 07 May 2008 09:43:59PM 0 points [-]

Eliezer: No doubt I am missing a lot. I have the idea of the wavefunction as a real thing, and I am not advocating a collapse interpretation. I am also uncomfortable with any kind of preferred basis. My idea is that the configuration space of the universe is the classical configuration space, but that its evolution is determined by the wavefunction over the quantum mechanical configuration space (in whatever basis you choose). So a point-particle has a real momentum and a real position, which are not simultaneously measureable. For electromagnetism, the electric and magnetic fields have actual values, which are also not simultaneously measurable. The fields evolve continuously but non-deterministically in accordance with the evolution of the wavefunction. There are still blobs of amplitude in configuration space, but only one point in one of those blobs is the real configuration.

Anonymous: I'll look at your reference to refresh my memory of Bohm. The last I heard, there were problems with relativistic versions of that theory.

Comment author: punctumm 12 December 2011 03:58:37AM 0 points [-]

electric and magnetic fields have actual values, which are also not simultaneously measurable.

Actually, they are the same thing, so if you know one, you know the other... they are definitely NOT conjugate variables (variables that cannot be measured at the same time).