You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

PhilGoetz comments on Schroedinger's cat is always dead - Less Wrong Discussion

-14 Post author: PhilGoetz 26 August 2011 05:58PM

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

Comments (56)

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

Comment author: PhilGoetz 27 August 2011 03:01:55PM *  -2 points [-]

Look: I did NOT CLAIM THAT CONSCIOUSNESS COLLAPSES THE WAVEFUNCTION. Just READ the post. I am not going to explain it again. It is VERY CLEAR that it is presenting TWO alternatives, ONE of which is that consciousness collapses the waveform.

Almost everyone simply chooses one of the two alternatives, and says, "That's impossible!".

Please stop doing that. In general. This is the nature of the post: You have only 2 obvious alternatives, and BOTH of them are impossible.

I am NOT proposing a solution. I am NOT saying that the cat is always dead. I am pointing out that there is no currently viable solution.

If you can't resolve the situation BY PICKING ONE OF THE TWO ALTERNATIVES - NOT by dismissing one and ignoring the other - you should change your downvote to an upvote.

Note:Mitchell Porter is very smart, and did not actually say that I said that consciousness collapses the waveform.

Comment author: Mitchell_Porter 28 August 2011 03:55:09AM 0 points [-]

Phil, this comment was not directed specifically at you. It was my way of saying that all the discussion in the comments was based on the false premise that the choice is between "wavefunctions are real and they collapse" and "wavefunctions are real and they don't collapse". Your post offered that as the choice too, but you didn't originate that misconception, you were just expressing the local paradigm.