Multiverse vs Copenhagen, John von Neumann

In summary: John von Neumann's interpretation of quantum mechanics is that consciousness collapses the wave function. Copenhagen is a similar idea, but does not mention it as categorically. Multiverse interpretation of QM says that there is no wave function collapse, and so the observer or consciousness has no role in it. However, if an observer chooses to observe a particle, many other alternative universes may be created.
  • #1
E=mc4
16
0
According to John von Neumann’s interpretation of QM, consciousness is why the wave function collapses. Copenhagen is on the same general idea, but does not mention it that categorically.

Multiverse interpretation of QM says there is no wave function collapse, therefore the observer or consciousness has no role in it. All probabilities of a particle exist in other alternative universes. So we come to the following scenarios.

Either all the other alternative universes exist already. This would make sense in Einstein’s universe were all spacetime is a continuum and therefore all is already determined from the beginning (no real choices); or

The observer by observing a possibility of a particle, chooses an alternative universe, many other alternative universes split from this original act. In this scenario, the observer plays a bigger role than in the Copenhagen or John von Neumann interpretation.

In this interpretation the observer does not collapse a wave function, it creates alternative universes.

Which is more crazy?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
E=mc4 said:
According to John von Neumann’s interpretation of QM, consciousness is why the wave function collapses. Copenhagen is on the same general idea, but does not mention it that categorically.

Multiverse interpretation of QM says there is no wave function collapse, therefore the observer or consciousness has no role in it. All probabilities of a particle exist in other alternative universes. So we come to the following scenarios.

Either all the other alternative universes exist already. This would make sense in Einstein’s universe were all spacetime is a continuum and therefore all is already determined from the beginning (no real choices); or

The observer by observing a possibility of a particle, chooses an alternative universe, many other alternative universes split from this original act. In this scenario, the observer plays a bigger role than in the Copenhagen or John von Neumann interpretation.

In this interpretation the observer does not collapse a wave function, it creates alternative universes.

Which is more crazy?




and which is more sexy?
 
  • #3
E=mc4 said:
According to John von Neumann’s interpretation of QM, consciousness is why the wave function collapses. Copenhagen is on the same general idea, but does not mention it that categorically.

Either...

or...

Which is more crazy?

I don't believe than von Neuman ever subscribed to the "consciousness collapses the wave function". There are so many versions of Copenhagen out there that I can't say you are wrong but, most people who advocate Copenhagen do not hold this position. The only prominent physicist who did was Eugene Wigner and he later recanted.

As to the "either.. or..." who is more crazy question. Perhaps both are wrong. There are many other alternatives out there "decoherence" is one and another is that the wave function is merely an encapsulation of the observers knowledge of the quantum system; when the observer performs a measurement he has new information and the wave function "instantaneously" changes as he incorporates the new information into his wave function.

Skippy
 

1. What is the Multiverse Theory and how does it differ from the Copenhagen Interpretation?

The Multiverse Theory proposes the existence of multiple universes, each with its own set of physical laws and constants. It suggests that every possible outcome of a quantum event actually occurs, resulting in an infinite number of parallel universes. The Copenhagen Interpretation, on the other hand, states that the act of observation or measurement collapses the wave function of a quantum system, determining its state.

2. Who is John von Neumann and what is his contribution to the debate between Multiverse and Copenhagen?

John von Neumann was a Hungarian-American mathematician and physicist who made significant contributions to the fields of quantum mechanics and game theory. He is known for his mathematical proof of the equivalence between the Copenhagen Interpretation and the Many-Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics.

3. What is the Many-Worlds Interpretation and how does it relate to the Multiverse Theory?

The Many-Worlds Interpretation, also known as the Everett Interpretation, is a quantum mechanical interpretation that suggests the existence of multiple parallel universes. It states that when a quantum event occurs, the universe splits into multiple parallel universes, with each possible outcome of the event occurring in a different universe. This is similar to the concept of the Multiverse Theory, which also proposes the existence of multiple parallel universes.

4. What evidence supports the Multiverse Theory and the Copenhagen Interpretation?

Currently, there is no definitive evidence for either the Multiverse Theory or the Copenhagen Interpretation. Both theories are interpretations of quantum mechanics and cannot be directly tested or observed. However, some experiments, such as the double-slit experiment, have been used to support the Copenhagen Interpretation, while other theories, such as inflationary cosmology, provide some evidence for the Multiverse Theory.

5. Can the Multiverse Theory and the Copenhagen Interpretation coexist?

Yes, it is possible for the Multiverse Theory and the Copenhagen Interpretation to coexist. Many physicists believe that both theories are simply different interpretations of the same underlying reality and may both hold some truth. Some even suggest that the Multiverse Theory may provide a possible explanation for the collapse of the wave function in the Copenhagen Interpretation. Ultimately, the true nature of reality may be a combination of both theories, or something entirely different.

Similar threads

A What is von Neumann's branching of possible worlds?
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
3
Views
1K
I How To Experimentally Confirm the Wigner-Von Neumann Interpretation
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
52
Views
1K
I Input on a basic Copenhagen question
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
15
Views
2K
I Why can't there be a Universal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics?
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
14
Views
2K
Von Neumann QM Rules Equivalent to Bohm?
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
7
Replies
235
Views
15K
I Collapse of particle wave function and single Universe wave function?
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
43
Views
914
Von Neumann replicator vehicle model
    • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
23
Views
1K
Did John von Neumann ever go to Oslo or any other part of Norway?
    • General Discussion
Replies
1
Views
933
I How to envision particles in superposition in Many Worlds presplitting
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
7
Views
1K
I Wigner's Friend shows the difference between Observer and Measurement
    • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
4
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top