MWI and FTL Communication Possibilities

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter peter0302
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Communication Ftl Mwi
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) in the context of potential faster-than-light (FTL) communication through quantum entanglement, referencing Cramer's experiment. It posits that if A sends a message to B via quantum mechanics, B's observations may appear as a message despite A not having sent it from B's perspective. The conversation explores the paradox of B sending a message back to A, suggesting that this does not alter B's prior observations due to the branching nature of the wavefunction in MWI. Ultimately, the conclusion is that successful results from Cramer's experiment would reinforce MWI over other interpretations of quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Quantum Mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI)
  • Knowledge of Cramer's experiment and its implications
  • Concept of quantum entanglement and decoherence
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Cramer's experiment on MWI and quantum communication
  • Study the principles of quantum entanglement and its limitations
  • Explore the concept of decoherence in quantum mechanics
  • Investigate the philosophical implications of MWI in relation to causality
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, quantum mechanics enthusiasts, and researchers interested in the implications of MWI and FTL communication theories.

peter0302
Messages
876
Reaction score
3
I know that currently accepted theory is that entanglement cannot - and never will - be used to send FTL communications.

Leaving that minor detail aside, what I am not clear on is why _quantum_ FTL communication would necessarily violate SR if one believes in MWI.

Let's say Cramer's experiment worked. If A sends a message to B using this method, the result is that B experiences what would be - quantum mechanically speaking - a very impropable but nonetheless possible series of observations which he interprets as a message. In fact, what is really happening (in MWI) is that A has moved into a branch in which B has experienced this very unlikely series of observations which look like a message.

And let's say further that A and B are moving relativistically w/r/t one another and therefore when B makes these observations, A hasn't actually sent the message (from B's perspective). But, nonetheless B is in a universe in which the communication-related particles have nonetheless done what they did. So, permit B to send a message to A telling him not to send the message to B. Paradox?

Not necessarily, right? Because B is in a universe/branch in which the message was "received" - aka the particles behaved in such a way as to transmit information - does not mean that A - in B's branch - deciding not to send the message will change what B had already observed.

Put in cheap sci-fi terms, a new timeline has been created.

Put in QM terms, A and B simply find themselves in whatever branch of the wavefunction creeates a consistent causal history. B's sending a message back to A telling him not to send the original message will surely be received in some _other_ branch of A, but because B (after receipt of the message) only exists in branches in which the message was sent and the relevant particles have already decohered, B's actions are not going to affect what B has already observed. If B went and asked A whether he'd received the message, he'd surely say no.

Does this jive with orthodox MWI or am I completely in left field? And if I am right, wouldn't Cramer's experiment - if successful - prove MWI above any other interpretation?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The splitting of the worlds (assuming the whole thing hangs together pending a derivation of the Born rule) simply does not permit any signalling. Bob's statistics are unaffected by anything any version of Alice does or how many versions of Alice there are simply due to how marginal probabilities work in Quantum Mechanics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
879
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 94 ·
4
Replies
94
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K