Nima Arkani-Hamed's opinion on Many Worlds?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Nima Arkani-Hamed expresses an open stance towards the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics, indicating that he does not dismiss the possibility of a multiverse. However, he has also suggested that while MWI may be true in a theoretical sense, it does not apply to real-life scenarios. This duality in his perspective has led to confusion among observers, particularly regarding his views on wavefunction collapse, which is a critical aspect of MWI. Clarifying his position requires consulting his published literature or directly engaging with him for accurate insights.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles
  • Familiarity with the Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI)
  • Knowledge of wavefunction collapse concepts
  • Ability to analyze scientific literature
NEXT STEPS
  • Research Nima Arkani-Hamed's published papers on quantum mechanics
  • Explore the implications of wavefunction collapse in quantum interpretations
  • Investigate the philosophical implications of the Many Worlds Interpretation
  • Review discussions on multiverse theories in contemporary physics
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, students of quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the philosophical debates surrounding interpretations of quantum theory.

Suekdccia
Messages
352
Reaction score
30
TL;DR
Nima Arkani-Hamed's opinion on Many Worlds?
I am writing a blog about physics and one of the sections is about the different interpretations of quantum mechanics and some of its supporters.

I was wondering what was the opinion of the physicist Nima Arkani-Hamed towards the Many Worlds interpretation...

I ask this because I found somewhat contradictory situations about his opinion on the subject. On the one hand, he is open to the possibility of the multiverse being true (and he does not make distinctions, so there is no reason why he would reject a many-world like model) and he also made a few talks where he proposed that there is no wavefunction collapse () a key assunption in many worlds...

However, in this reddit post () a user indicated that he thought that physicist Arkani Hamed said in an interview that Many Worlds interpretation was true but "obviously not in real life"...

It seems a bit confusing since I thought he was a strong Many Worlds supporter (and now I am not sure) so I find strange that he said that this interpretation is obviously not correct in the real life. Is he open to the possibility of it being true? Does he support it?
 
  • Wow
Likes   Reactions: Demystifier
Physics news on Phys.org
Sounds like the reddit user needs professional help, to be honest. Also, the claim by the user doesn't necessarily reflect fact (note your use of 'he thought that'). You can think a lot of things - whether they're true or not is another story. I suggest looking for better references to back up claims/support your questions.
 
I don't have much to contribute to an answer to the question. I will just say that it seems to me a mistake to take someone's view about the multiverse (i.e. a view about cosmology) and draw any conclusions about their view on many-world interpretations (i.e. a view about quantum interpretations).
 
The OP could always go straight to the source and ask this particular person what his view on the many-worlds interpretation is. He'd be in a better position to answer.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gentzen
I see nothing strange in the idea that MWI is true physically, but not in real life. Many ideas in physics are naturally thought of as true physically, but not in real life. Here are some examples:
- Behavior of matter, including the behavior of human beings, is not governed by goals in the future.
- Behavior of matter is neither good nor bad, it doesn't have any ethical value.
- Matter governed by deterministic or probabilistic laws of physics does not have free will. (Deterministic behavior is not free, while random behavior cannot have will.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 157 ·
6
Replies
157
Views
5K
  • · Replies 174 ·
6
Replies
174
Views
14K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K