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.

V_V comments on How do you tell proto-science from pseudo-science? - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: DataPacRat 27 November 2013 07:15PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (88)

Comments (88)

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

Comment author: V_V 28 November 2013 10:57:46PM 0 points [-]

This is a misconception. Many worlds has one fewer postulate then Copenhagen quantum, so there are operations you can do in Copenhagen that don't make sense in Everettian quantum (measurement as a projection operator). Most of the physicist I know who object to many worlds object that it doesn't have enough structure in the postulates to actually get predictions out.

The complaint is that MWI is not complete enough to give a satisfactory interpretation for the Born rule. Nevertheless, those who support MWI do believe that Born rule is essentially accurate.

Comment author: EHeller 29 November 2013 01:39:15AM 0 points [-]

Nevertheless, those who support MWI do believe that Born rule is essentially accurate.

Sure, its obvious empirically.

The question is- can you do without the measurement postulate and recover the Born rule. If you can't, then Everett's interpretation doesn't work, you still have an ugly measurement postulate grafted on to the unitary theory, and you gain no elegance.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit