## The wave-function of the universe

We know the universe is not in a supposition state, so the wave-function of the universe must have collapsed at some point. However, since I am not all that familiar with physics, I wanted to know if this required an observer? If not, then how else could this have happened?
 PhysOrg.com physics news on PhysOrg.com >> Kenneth Wilson, Nobel winner for physics, dies>> Two collider research teams find evidence of new particle Zc(3900)>> Scientists make first direct images of topological insulator's edge currents

Mentor
Blog Entries: 28
 Quote by Rational T We know the universe is not in a supposition state, so the wave-function of the universe must have collapsed at some point. However, since I am not all that familiar with physics, I wanted to know if this required an observer? If not, then how else could this have happened?
Can you describe what is this "wavefunction of the universe" that you seem to have a knowledge of?

Zz.

 Quote by ZapperZ Can you describe what is this "wavefunction of the universe" that you seem to have a knowledge of? Zz.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_wavefunction

The universe is obviously not is a supposition state, if it was we would not be here. Since wave-functions collapse if there is an observer, then an observer must have collapsed the wave-function of the universe. If not, how else did the wave-function of the universe collapse?

Mentor
Blog Entries: 28

## The wave-function of the universe

 Quote by Rational T http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_wavefunction The universe is obviously not is a supposition state, if it was we would not be here. Since wave-functions collapse if there is an observer, then an observer must have collapsed the wave-function of the universe. If not, how else did the wave-function of the universe collapse?
You should read your own source very carefully. Universal is NOT the same as "universe"!

Zz.

 Quote by ZapperZ You should read your own source very carefully. Universal is NOT the same as "universe"! Zz.
Saying "the wave-function of the universe" is the exact same thing as saying "the universal wave-function". According to your logic, universal laws and the laws of the universe are different because they are worded differently. You have presented nothing more than a semantical argument based on a misunderstanding.

The wave-function of the universe = The universal wave-function.

Since it takes an observer to collapse a wave-function, then it seems reasonable to assume that an observer collapsed the universal wave-function. If an observer did not collapse the universal wave-function, then what did? The universal wave-function obviously collapsed, or else we wouldn't be here and existence would just be in a quantum state of uncertainty.

This could all be completely wrong, but I would like to know why it is wrong. So far, you have not answered any of my questions sufficiently.
 Mentor Blog Entries: 28 Sorry, but I don't think you know what you are talking about. You are making erroneous assumption of something you do not understand. Please reread the PF rules that you had agreed to. Zz.

 Similar discussions for: The wave-function of the universe Thread Forum Replies Quantum Physics 17 Beyond the Standard Model 21 Quantum Physics 3 General Physics 18 General Physics 4