I'm currently reading "Three roads to Quantum Gravity" by Lee Smolin. In the book he describes attending a presentation by Fay Dowker and James Hartle about the consistent histories approach to quantum cosmology. He describes that, "there were worlds that were classical now that were arbitrarily mixed up superpositions of classical at any point in the past", and that they concluded that, "if the consistent-histories interpretation is correct, we have no right to deduce from the existence of fossils right now that dinosaurs roamed the planet a hundred million years ago". This really confused me. I don't understand the how the quote about dinosaurs relates to the topic in the way he describes it. Why do we have no right to deduce that from fossils because of this theory? I am by no means a very intelligent person. I recently started trying to teach myself more. I was just wondering if someone could explain this to me in a relatively simple way. Thanks.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# The consistent histories approach to quantum cosmology

Have something to add?

Draft saved
Draft deleted

Loading...

Similar Threads for consistent histories approach |
---|

I History of the Universe and measured outcomes |

B What does the 'space' inside an atom consist of? |

I Schroedinger Cats and Consistent Histories |

I Instrumentalism and consistency |

I Establishing consistency between a wave model of the photon and a particle model |

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**