Parallel Universes: The Mind-Boggling Reality Confirmed by Oxford Scientists

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of parallel universes, particularly in relation to recent mathematical findings by Oxford scientists that support the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. Participants explore the implications of these findings, the validity of the interpretations, and the surrounding media coverage.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the mathematical viability of the Many Worlds interpretation does not provide a means to differentiate it from other interpretations of quantum mechanics.
  • Concerns are raised about the media's portrayal of the findings, particularly regarding claims about time travel and the implications of the Many Worlds interpretation on such concepts.
  • Participants express skepticism about the lack of accessible work or documentation from the recent conference marking the 50th anniversary of Everett's theory.
  • There is mention of Dr. Deutsch's claims regarding quantum computing and its potential to validate the Many Worlds view, though some participants express concerns about the security implications of such technology.
  • One participant references a claim that a professor at Oxford suggested there are at least 10^102 parallel universes, indicating a level of confusion or exaggeration in public understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express skepticism about the excitement surrounding the findings, with multiple competing views on the implications and validity of the Many Worlds interpretation. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the significance of the mathematical discoveries and their practical applications.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the available information regarding the recent conference and the specific work presented, as no papers or transcripts are currently accessible. This may affect the clarity of the discussion and the claims made by participants.

SF
This is the newest science hype on the market:

Parallel universes really do exist, according to a mathematical discovery by Oxford scientists that sweeps away one of the key objections to the mind boggling and controversial idea.

[..]

Dr Deutsch showed mathematically that the bush-like branching structure created by the universe splitting into parallel versions of itself can explain the probabilistic nature of quantum outcomes. This work was attacked but it has now had rigorous confirmation by David Wallace and Simon Saunders, also at Oxford.

Dr Saunders, who presented the work with Wallace at the Many Worlds at 50 conference at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, told New Scientist: "We've cleared up the obscurities and come up with a pretty clear verdict that Everett works. It's a dramatic turnaround and it means that people now have to discuss Everett seriously."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ma...007/09/21/sciuni121.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=paUniverse_sun14_parallel_universes&show_article=1&cat=0
 
Space news on Phys.org
Eh, not exciting. So he showed that the Many Worlds interpretation is mathematically viable. Still doesn't give us any way to differentiate it from any of the other interpretations of QM.

I also like how the article says that this means that time travel is possible since the Many Worlds intepretation removes the killing-your-grandfather paradox. But in reality, there are other ways of resolving this paradox, and so in itself, this says nothing about the possibilities of time travel.

I agree -- this sounds like hype, but nothing more. Maybe I'm missing something?
 
I hate articles like that: does anyone know what work has actually been done?

(That the telegraph mainly devotes itself to announcing a possibility of Doctor-Who style time-travel is ridiculous. Journalists reporting on experts should also ask those experts to edit their respective stories.)
 
cesiumfrog said:
does anyone know what work has actually been done?

There has been a conference at PI ending today to mark the 50th anniversary of Everett theory, http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/en/Events/Many_Worlds_at_50/Schedule/ but apparently there is no paper or transcript available for now. It sounds anyway like a followup has been presented on the Deutsch-Wallace theory of quantum probability and Born's rule derivation (you may check http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9906015, http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0211104 and http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0312157, and also Saunders in http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0412194).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Deutsch, in his book "The Fabric of Reality," claims to have found the first algorithm for factoring huge numbers in a moment by using quantum computing. If this were to work, he would not only break most existing codes, but also show the Many Worlds view to be practically based.

I believe that Dr. Deutsch is respected in the field of quantum mechanics.
 
Loren Booda said:
Dr. Deutsch, in his book "The Fabric of Reality," claims to have found the first algorithm for factoring huge numbers in a moment by using quantum computing. If this were to work, he would not only break most existing codes, but also show the Many Worlds view to be practically based.

I believe that Dr. Deutsch is respected in the field of quantum mechanics.

I love knowledge, especially quantum mechanics and computers (I was a computer science major as an undergrad at college). But I am also very fearful. When they get quantum computers working, no existing security system will be safe anymore (ok, maybe I'm being a bit too inclusive here). Online banking and probably the entire military will fall under attacks they're not prepared for.

The only part of it that keeps me happy is that it will be a very long time before that technology can fall into the wrong hands, and hopefully by then we will have developed security at an increased enough complexity.

Sorry if this sounded off topic, but I do believe it is a very real concern to be considered if this work goes as planned.
 
I heard two people a week ago that heard about this—they were convinced that a professor at Oxford proved that there are at least 10>102 parallel universes.
 

Similar threads

Graduate Explaining the Quantum Mystery: Are Parallel Universes the Answer?
  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
17K