MWI -- Infinite number of worlds?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics, specifically addressing the implications of continuous probability spectra and the nature of universes within this framework. Participants explore theoretical aspects, ontological questions, and the relationship between measurement and branching worlds.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if MWI is adopted, a single measurement could imply an infinite number of resulting universes corresponding to a continuous probability spectrum.
  • Others argue that MWI inherently suggests an infinite number of worlds, even with a finite number of outcomes, as worlds emerge based on probabilities assigned to different outcomes.
  • There is a contention regarding the ontology of reality in MWI, with some asserting it lacks clarity while others maintain that it provides a clear picture despite challenges in matching it with experimental results.
  • Some participants question whether a position can ever have an exact value, suggesting that measurements may not yield definitive outcomes due to the nature of quantum states.
  • A later reply challenges the assumption that bulk matter behaves linearly, arguing that nonlinear dynamics complicate the application of the superposition principle to macroscopic objects.
  • Concerns are raised about how macroscopic objects can enter superposition before decoherence, with references to specific experiments that may illustrate these phenomena.
  • Participants discuss the implications of decoherence on the classification of worlds, suggesting that the basis selected out by decoherence determines the nature of branching worlds.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion reflects multiple competing views regarding the nature of worlds in MWI, the implications of continuous probability spectra, and the ontological status of reality. No consensus is reached on these issues.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to assumptions about linear versus nonlinear dynamics in many-body systems and the implications for the superposition principle. The discussion also highlights unresolved questions about measurement and the nature of eigenstates.

  • #31
Cten said:
One conceptual/aesthetic/realism issue with MWI that arises for most of us relative laypeople is the notional continuous creation (to borrow an older term) of virtually infinite mass, energy and information at every decision point.

MWI does not say this happens. In MWI, the wave function is the reality, and there is only one wave function. It doesn't split. The appearance of multiple "worlds" comes from picking out particular terms in the wave function in some chosen basis and calling them "worlds". But there is only one wave function, and it always evolves unitarily in time, and unitary evolution can't create or destroy anything.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
entropy1 said:
Then it seems to me that MWI is really telling us that we can't say anything about the ontology of reality, right?

Yes! There is no single reality, which is essentially equivalent to no reality.
 
  • #33
PeterDonis said:
MWI does not say this happens. In MWI, the wave function is the reality, and there is only one wave function. It doesn't split. The appearance of multiple "worlds" comes from picking out particular terms in the wave function in some chosen basis and calling them "worlds". But there is only one wave function, and it always evolves unitarily in time, and unitary evolution can't create or destroy anything.

Helpful - thanks! First learned (a very little) about Everett and his work in the 1960s, and apparently been carrying around a distorted mental picture ever since.
 
  • #34
Lord Jestocost said:
There is no single reality

This is not what MWI says. MWI says there is a single reality, and it is the wave function.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • · Replies 117 ·
4
Replies
117
Views
12K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 183 ·
7
Replies
183
Views
19K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K