Peterdjones comments on If Many-Worlds Had Come First - Less Wrong

44 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 10 May 2008 07:43AM

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

Comments (179)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: Dustin2 10 May 2008 11:23:56PM 14 points [-]

I don't see how decoherence is an automatic win for MWI. Decoherence has been used in several different interpretations of quantum mechanics, notably in consistent histories and in certain hidden variable interpretations. Why should we choose MWI before those, particularly since it seems less parsimonious than consistent histories? For that matter, the language of Rovelli and Smolin's relational quantum mechanics very nearly turns decoherence into its own interpretation (if you compare papers on decoherence which shirk the metaphysical interpretation to the interpretation put forward by Rovelli, they're almost identical). Relational quantum mechanics requires much less in the way of grand assertions than MWI and is a natural framework for decoherence, so why pick MWI over relational quantum mechanics?

Comment author: Peterdjones 02 July 2011 04:12:07PM 1 point [-]

Relational quantum mechanics requires much less in the way of grand assertions than MWI and is a natural framework for decoherence, so why pick MWI over relational quantum mechanics?

Hear, hear.

Comment author: XiXiDu 02 July 2011 04:37:28PM 9 points [-]

That sure is far beyond my current educational horizon but I would love to see Eliezer answer that comment. Until now I haven't even heard of Relational Quantum Mechanics. I searched LW and that comment by Dustin2 seems to be one of two comments that mention it.