Improbability of the Many-Worlds Interpretation?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics, which posits that all possible alternate histories and futures are real, each representing a distinct universe. Participants argue that if MWI were true, there should exist a universe where human civilization advanced significantly faster, yet no evidence of such contact or colonization exists, suggesting MWI's improbability. The conversation also explores the implications of causally disconnected worlds, emphasizing that events in one universe cannot affect another, thereby questioning the feasibility of inter-universal travel or communication.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) in quantum mechanics
  • Familiarity with quantum decoherence
  • Basic knowledge of unitary evolution in physics
  • Concept of causally disconnected universes
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of quantum decoherence on MWI
  • Explore the concept of unitary evolution in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate theories on inter-universal travel and their scientific basis
  • Examine philosophical implications of causally disconnected worlds
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for physicists, philosophers of science, and anyone interested in the implications of quantum mechanics and the Many-Worlds Interpretation.

  • #91
Michael Price said:
In the gas in a chamber example, yes, in anyone world if it is likely to occur in ##10^{70}## years then it occurs in some worlds splitting off right now.

Although it may or may not be relevant to the debate, if we are talking about the probability that all the air molecules in a room occupy one half of the room for a second, then the probability is more of the order of once every ##2^{10^{28}}## seconds, as an absolute maximum.

The other question is whether the split is into a) a large but finite number of worlds; b) a countable infinity of worlds; c) an uncountable infinity of worlds (which would be consistent with position being a continuous variable).

On the face of it a) implies that there are only finitely many possibilities, which undermines (in my view) the claim that "everything happens".

And, b) and c) may run into issues in mapping the mathematics to a verifiable reality. See above and compare a mathematical idea like Hilbert's Hotel with an infinitely splitting set of worlds.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
PeroK said:
Although it may or may not be relevant to the debate, if we are talking about the probability that all the air molecules in a room occupy one half of the room for a second, then the probability is more of the order of once every ##2^{10^{28}}## seconds, as an absolute maximum.

The other question is whether the split is into a) a large but finite number of worlds; b) a countable infinity of worlds; c) an uncountable infinity of worlds (which would be consistent with position being a continuous variable).

On the face of it a) implies that there are only finitely many possibilities, which undermines (in my view) the claim that "everything happens".

And, b) and c) may run into issues in mapping the mathematics to a verifiable reality. See above and compare a mathematical idea like Hilbert's Hotel with an infinitely splitting set of worlds.
Everett's position was c), expressed at a conference, 1962, at Xavier University.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
  • #93
Michael Price said:
In the gas in a chamber example, yes, in anyone world if it is likely to occur in ##10^{70}## years then it occurs in some worlds splitting off right now.

Only if you allow the possibility of this happening by a fantastically improbable quantum fluctuation, which, as I have already argued, makes the MWI undermine itself.
 
  • #94
PeterDonis said:
Only if you allow the possibility of this happening by a fantastically improbable quantum fluctuation, which, as I have already argued, makes the MWI undermine itself.
I responded to that argument but it got incomprehensibly moderated out.
 
  • #95
Michael Price said:
I responded to that argument but it got incomprehensibly moderated out.

That's because the moderators did not consider it an actual response but something approaching a troll. As far as further discussion in this thread is concerned, we'll just need to consider that subtopic closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K