bhobba said:
I don't have a Phd in math - I have the equivalent of an Honours degree in applied math and computer science. I have partially completed a masters but had to give it away for various reasons. I am self taught in physics so know exactly what is required to understand this stuff. A few weeks of an hour or so study each night is all that's required to learn enough to understand the technical explanation I gave.
If you don't want to do that you will be in a constant state of confusion going around in circles trying to understand what can't be understood without it. I gave the correct explanation - all that is needed is to understand it.
You may think its a mater of patience. IMHO it isn't. It's that this stuff can't be understood on the terms you want to understand it - it can't be done - wishful thinking that someone with more patience will do it simply will not work. This is not just my view eg have a look at the likes MFB gave my posts.
That's incorrect. But fits in with my observation you will not understand what's really being said if you don't know at least a smattering of the technicalities.
My ignorance ensemble interpretation is anostic to such things.
Thanks
Bill
What is funny is you don't understand Feeble question when he asked:
"When I recognize that the state of the entire expanded system is reduced correspondingly as the dust particle becomes localized, it seems as though the logical ramifications could (should?) expand exponentially throughout large swaths of the universe. Yes?"
Yet you answered "no". Later you mentioned the question kinda doesn't make even sense. So you should have answered "Feeble what you said doesn't make sense".
Anyway. I have read your every thread in this forums for more than a day and already get the gist of it. I know what you meant when you stated that
"You have |a> representing the state of the photons, |b> the state of the dust particle. The combined state is u = |a>|b>. Due to interactions between the two described by a Hamiltonian and Schroedinger's equation that state changes. The equation is i∂u/∂t = Hu where H is the Hamiltonian. You solve it to get the state at any time t. Now what we find is this new state is no longer factorisable into the state of the photons and the state of the dust particle. They are entangled. However if we just observe the dust particle we find its in a mixed state of position ie |b> = Σpi |bi><bi| where each |bi><bi| is an eigenstate of position. This means it can be interpreted as having a definite position with probability pi. Note I have used the notation for a state |a> and |a><a| interchangeably. What a state is and what it means is explained in the references - that's one of the things you need to understand. You can't understand this without it."
I understood it. Now I saw Feeble Wonk has been participating for more than 3 years in this thread. So I think he understood it too. Therefore I'd like him to ask the question using the above language.
Feeble. When you asked "When I recognize that the state of the entire expanded system is reduced correspondingly as the dust particle becomes localized, it seems as though the logical ramifications could (should?) expand exponentially throughout large swaths of the universe. Yes?" Can you rephrase it using Hobba language. I'll tried. Is it like asking:
"When you only have a few |a> representing the state of the photons, and |b> the state of the dust particle. And the simple combined state is u = |a>|b>. Due to interactions between the two described by a Hamiltonian and Schroedinger's equation that state changes. Does the state expand exponentially throughout large swaths of the universe?"
Feeble. I'm confused by your question. What do you mean "Does the state expand exponentially throughout large swaths of the universe?". Please use more accurate questions.
I'm interested in your interests in decoherence and have the same questions as you do.