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.

Will_Newsome comments on How accurate is the quantum physics sequence? - Less Wrong Discussion

45 Post author: ciphergoth 17 April 2012 06:54AM

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

Comments (68)

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

Comment author: shminux 02 September 2013 07:46:48PM -1 points [-]

But collapse interpretations require additional non-local algorithms

Not for computations, they do not. If you try to write a code simulating a QM system, end up writing unitary evolution on top of the elliptic time-independent SE (H psi = E psi) to describe the initial state. If you want to calculate probabilities, such as the pattern on the screen from the double-slit experiment, you apply the Born rule. And computational complexity is the only thing thing that matters for Occam's razor.