#### atyy

Science Advisor

- 13,331

- 1,484

I wrote "But that means that the statement "I am typing at a computer" is a statement that is real, even though it is not a statement in any framework. " in response to "Look, right now, I'm typing at a computer. I don't need a framework to tell me that."Why do you say that? A framework is a set of possible histories. "I am typing at a computer" is a possible history. So there is a framework in which that is a possible history.

There's a difference, because "I am typing at a computer" makes sense in one framework. However, "I am using framework 2" makes sense only in framework 1.Anyway, I don't see why you think there is any difference between "I am typing at a computer" and "I am typing at a computer, trying to figure out probabilities according to framework [itex]\mathcal{F}_2[/itex]". If the first can be "real", then so can the second.

A framework is just a classical stochastic process, so in that framework, one history is real each time you "run the experiment".What do you think "Using framework [itex]\mathcal{F}_2[/itex]" means? To me, it means that I'm trying to solve a particular mathematics problem, which is to compute probabilities for a particular set of histories, using the rules of quantum mechanics. None of those histories have to be "real" for me to be able to do that calculation.

But can they be about me? If they cannot, then the measurement problem is not solved.None of them have to be about me.