Quantum Suicide: Why is only experimenter convinced?

[zonde]

That's not quite true eg in the quantum eraser decoherence is undone.

In quantum eraser interference pattern is recovered in subensembles after detections with recorded timestamps are already made. It's hard to understand how do you interpret that as "decoherence is undone".

The modern view of observation is after decoherence.

If decoherence is modeled as interaction with environment i.e. certain physical process and not just interpretation, then it's subject to experimental verification.

 

[craigi]

Yes, that's right.

So we really need to review some of the recent literature. I don't have time to do that right now, but you'll be interested in Deutsch's paper entitled, "Quantum Theory as a Universal Physical Theory". I won't link it, because I think it's supposed to be behind a paywall.

 

[zonde]

So we really need to review some of the recent literature. I don't have time to do that right now, but you'll be interested in Deutsch's paper entitled, "Quantum Theory as a Universal Physical Theory". I won't link it, because I think it's supposed to be behind a paywall.

You can quote relevant arguments from Deutsch's paper.
Meanwhile I will give my argument. Results of observations and measurements can be shared, it means they can be copied without limit. Given theoretically unlimited number of possible copies (and copies of copies) how you can undo measurement?

 

[bhobba]

In quantum eraser interference pattern is recovered in subensembles after detections with recorded timestamps are already made. It's hard to understand how do you interpret that as "decoherence is undone".

Its well known:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...and-the-delayed-choice-quantum-eraser.623648/

If decoherence is modeled as interaction with environment i.e. certain physical process and not just interpretation, then it's subject to experimental verification.

Of course.

Thanks
Bill

 

[zonde]

Its well known:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...and-the-delayed-choice-quantum-eraser.623648/

Of course.

Well you are using decoherence in two different senses and you mix them in your arguments. It's very hard to have any discussion with you because of that.
There is decoherence as absence of coherence in beam of light (it does not show interference).
And there is decoherence as a hypothesis that explains something about measurement.

There are not much questions about one meaning as it is defined directly from observations.
The other one is rather speculative.

 

[bhobba]

Well you are using decoherence in two different senses and you mix them in your arguments

I am only using it in one sense as per the following:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/5439/1/Decoherence_Essay_arXiv_version.pdf

I can't ever recall it being used in the sense of photon coherence.

Thanks
Bill

 

[zonde]

I am only using it in one sense as per the following:
http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/5439/1/Decoherence_Essay_arXiv_version.pdf

Your source says that nowadays there is more than one sense for "decoherence".
"However, “decoherence” is now often used for a much more general idea, namely that of the environment-induced decoherence program, referring not only to the effect of decoherence itself, but also referring to
• its main cause, the ubiquitous and almost unavoidable interaction of a quantum system with its environment;
• its physical implications, expressed in predictions for empirically verifiable experiments;
• its conceptual implications, on for instance the traditional problem of quantum measurement, and the emergence of the classical world from a quantum reality.
It is important to distinguish between these last two points, because although the relevance of environment-induced decoherence on empirical outcomes is widely acknowledged, its conceptual implications are subject to much more controversy. Opinions range from solving (part of) the measurement problem, as founding decoherence theorists used to claim, to denying any conceptual implications apart from those illustrated any other quantum mechanical calculation."

I can't ever recall it being used in the sense of photon coherence.

When you refer to quantum eraser experiment you mean decoherence as our ability to see/not see interference pattern. When you say that decoherence can be undone you do not mean that measurement of individual photons can be undone.

 

[bhobba]

When you refer to quantum eraser experiment you mean decoherence as our ability to see/not see interference pattern. When you say that decoherence can be undone you do not mean that measurement of individual photons can be undone.

I mean the entanglement that allows us to determine which path information.

Thanks
Bill