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.

Luke_A_Somers comments on Open thread, August 5-11, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: David_Gerard 05 August 2013 06:50AM

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

Comments (307)

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

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 12 August 2013 02:02:28PM *  0 points [-]

What are you talking about? I've only taken one course in quantum field theory, but I've never heard of anything where quantum mechanics was not linear. Can you give me a citation? It seems to me that failure of linearity would either be irrelevant (superlinear case, low amplitudes) or so dominant that any linearity would be utterly irrelevant and the Born Probabilities wouldn't even be a good approximation.

Also, by 'the Schrodinger equation' I didn't mean the special form which is the fixed-particle Hamiltonian with pp/2m kinetic energy - I meant the general form -

i hbar (d/dt) Psi = Hamiltonian Psi

Note that the Dirac Equation is a special case of this general form of the Schrodinger Equation. MWI, 'naive' or not, has no trouble with variations in particle number.