Recent content by Quantumental

  1. Q

    Many Worlds Interpretations and probabilities

    I feel like you are always talking with 2 tongues, on one hand you dismiss MWI because it's too weird, then you go onto say: nature is weird, therefore MWI doesn't have to explain itself, yet I don't believe it. Sometimes I am wondering if you are a hardcore MWI proponent that just troll for...
  2. Q

    I Why aren't we on maverick branches?

    This one is dedicated to my dear Everettians: http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.08881 What is interesting to me is that Stephen Hsu has previously been a very outspoken proponent of Everett.
  3. Q

    Many Worlds - What drives the parallel branching?

    Where have you sen this presented a few times recently? I presented it in this forum about half a year ago and everyone considered it pretty much a moot point. I know Alastair Wilson has done work on this, but other than him I rarely see it discussed.
  4. Q

    META - Mods please stop closing QM interpretation threads

    Why? Interpretations has been an integral part of science since forever. It is awfully inconsiderate and non-professional of mods here to shutdown these threads that are clearly in high demand since they pop up all the time. If they were truly clogging up the forum I would be completely...
  5. Q

    META - Mods please stop closing QM interpretation threads

    I disagree. Interpretations has lead to new theorems (Bells Theorem) and new experiments. There are also several conclusions to be reached about inter-interpretational (which the last thread you closed was about) issues. It's not wasteful discussions. I find it very close minded of you to...
  6. Q

    META - Mods please stop closing QM interpretation threads

    But there are conclusions to be reached. There's a reason these threads is vastly more active than other threads. I don't see any reason whatsoever for closing a perfectly good and serious discussion that is at peak activity
  7. Q

    META - Mods please stop closing QM interpretation threads

    Way too many valuable and technical discussions that are outside the realm of 'pure philosophy' gets shutdown here way too often. The last one was a highly productive and interesting thread about technical issues within the Many Worlds Interpretation. Sure some of the posts at the end were...
  8. Q

    Why does nothing happen in MWI?

    Happy to see this topic getting some serious discussion, as it deserves. My question for you Derek Potter with regards to the Many-Many worlds you seem to be a proponent of, is how you get the probabilities correct?
  9. Q

    Where is the flaw with predetermined entanglement state?

    Not really. Check out Gerard 't Hoofts proposals
  10. Q

    Where is the flaw with predetermined entanglement state?

    But why is it then unpalatable? We live in a infinite ocean of somethingness. Is it really that hard to accept that everything is fine tuned at the beginning?
  11. Q

    Where is the flaw with predetermined entanglement state?

    I feel that Complete / Absolute / Total / Omni-determinism is a better word for it. SUPER sounds so.. weird. All it really is, is complete determinism. Which shouldn't be too hard to swallow if you already accept either Bohm or Many Worlds which is equally absolute in their determinism
  12. Q

    More evidence that the wavefunction is ontologically real?

    This is what happens when otherwise very smart people decide to ignore philosophy. Saying that the worlds aren't in the wavefunction doesn't actually remove them. As has been argued in the litterature before: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1659/1/Cushing.pdf
  13. Q

    More evidence that the wavefunction is ontologically real?

    No. If you want an ontological wavefunction and you accept functionalism you do not get to say that by magic the worlds do not occur in the wavefunction
  14. Q

    More evidence that the wavefunction is ontologically real?

    But in Bohm, given the ontological nature of the WF it's hard to see how you avoid infinite Many Worlds with 1 special particle world.
  15. Q

    Quantum Suicide: Why is only experimenter convinced?

    Did you read the section of Overlap vs Divergence? This is where he makes his argument
Top