The wave-function of the universe

  • Thread starter Rational T
  • Start date
  • #1
Rational T
45
0
We know the universe is not in a supposition state, so the wave-function of the universe must have collapsed at some point. However, since I am not all that familiar with physics, I wanted to know if this required an observer? If not, then how else could this have happened?
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,994
4,715
We know the universe is not in a supposition state, so the wave-function of the universe must have collapsed at some point. However, since I am not all that familiar with physics, I wanted to know if this required an observer? If not, then how else could this have happened?

Can you describe what is this "wavefunction of the universe" that you seem to have a knowledge of?

Zz.
 
  • #3
Rational T
45
0
Can you describe what is this "wavefunction of the universe" that you seem to have a knowledge of?

Zz.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_wavefunction

The universe is obviously not is a supposition state, if it was we would not be here. Since wave-functions collapse if there is an observer, then an observer must have collapsed the wave-function of the universe. If not, how else did the wave-function of the universe collapse?
 
  • #4
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,994
4,715
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_wavefunction

The universe is obviously not is a supposition state, if it was we would not be here. Since wave-functions collapse if there is an observer, then an observer must have collapsed the wave-function of the universe. If not, how else did the wave-function of the universe collapse?

You should read your own source very carefully. Universal is NOT the same as "universe"!

Zz.
 
  • #5
Rational T
45
0
You should read your own source very carefully. Universal is NOT the same as "universe"!

Zz.

Saying "the wave-function of the universe" is the exact same thing as saying "the universal wave-function". According to your logic, universal laws and the laws of the universe are different because they are worded differently. You have presented nothing more than a semantical argument based on a misunderstanding.

The wave-function of the universe = The universal wave-function.

Since it takes an observer to collapse a wave-function, then it seems reasonable to assume that an observer collapsed the universal wave-function. If an observer did not collapse the universal wave-function, then what did? The universal wave-function obviously collapsed, or else we wouldn't be here and existence would just be in a quantum state of uncertainty.

This could all be completely wrong, but I would like to know why it is wrong. So far, you have not answered any of my questions sufficiently.
 
  • #6
ZapperZ
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Insights Author
35,994
4,715
Sorry, but I don't think you know what you are talking about. You are making erroneous assumption of something you do not understand. Please reread the PF rules that you had agreed to.

Zz.
 

Suggested for: The wave-function of the universe

  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
384
Replies
1
Views
318
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
738
Replies
8
Views
452
Replies
21
Views
490
Replies
3
Views
487
Replies
59
Views
1K
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
416
Top