I Many-Worlds-Interpretation: reintegration?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter bbbl67
  • Start date Start date
bbbl67
Messages
216
Reaction score
21
Now, the MWI makes all kinds of predictions about universes splitting apart as quantum fluctuations cause particles to take different paths. So if there are many paths a particle can take from point A to point B, the universe splits apart into many universes, does that imply that once the particle has reached point B (whichever possible paths it took), that the universe reintegrates into a single universe again?

Does this also imply that the universe doesn't split apart in its entirety, just in local causally-connected regions, before reintegrating?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bbbl67 said:
Now, the MWI makes all kinds of predictions about universes splitting apart as quantum fluctuations cause particles to take different paths.

No, that's not what the MWI says. Only different macroscopic measurement results cause "splitting" of worlds (which is a misleading description anyway). In an experiment like the double slit, where the particle can take multiple paths to reach a particular spot on the screen where a detection is observed, there is no "splitting" in the MWI because of those multiple paths.

bbbl67 said:
does that imply that once the particle has reached point B (whichever possible paths it took), that the universe reintegrates into a single universe again?

No, because there was no "splitting" in the first place. See above.
 
PeterDonis said:
No, that's not what the MWI says. Only different macroscopic measurement results cause "splitting" of worlds (which is a misleading description anyway). In an experiment like the double slit, where the particle can take multiple paths to reach a particular spot on the screen where a detection is observed, there is no "splitting" in the MWI because of those multiple paths.
No, because there was no "splitting" in the first place. See above.
So does the MWI predict any splitting at all?
 
bbbl67 said:
does the MWI predict any splitting at all?

I already answered this in post #2, in the second sentence in what you quoted.
 
I understand that the world of interpretations of quantum mechanics is very complex, as experimental data hasn't completely falsified the main deterministic interpretations (such as Everett), vs non-deterministc ones, however, I read in online sources that Objective Collapse theories are being increasingly challenged. Does this mean that deterministic interpretations are more likely to be true? I always understood that the "collapse" or "measurement problem" was how we phrased the fact that...
I keep reading throughout this forum from many members that the general motivation for finding a deeper explanation within QM, specifically with regards to quantum entanglement, is due to an inability to grasp reality based off of classical intuitions. On the other hand, if QM was truly incomplete, and there was a deeper explanation that we haven't grasped yet that would explain why particles tend to be correlated to each other seemingly instantly despite vast separated distances, then that...
Back
Top