The wave-function of the universe

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Rational T
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of the wave-function of the universe, particularly focusing on its collapse and the role of observers in this process. Participants explore theoretical implications and seek clarification on the definitions and interpretations of the wave-function in the context of the universe.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the wave-function of the universe must have collapsed at some point, questioning whether this collapse requires an observer.
  • One participant references the concept of the universal wave-function and argues that it is synonymous with the wave-function of the universe, suggesting that an observer must have caused its collapse.
  • Another participant challenges the interpretation of "universal" versus "universe," arguing that the distinction is semantic and does not affect the underlying concept.
  • Concerns are raised about the understanding of the wave-function and the assumptions being made regarding its collapse and the necessity of an observer.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessity of an observer for the collapse of the wave-function of the universe. There is no consensus on the definitions or implications of the wave-function, leading to ongoing debate.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference external sources to support their claims, but there are unresolved issues regarding the definitions and interpretations of key terms, as well as the assumptions underlying their arguments.

Rational T
Messages
45
Reaction score
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?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Rational T said:
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.
 
ZapperZ said:
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?
 
Rational T said:
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.
 
ZapperZ said:
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.
 
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.
 

Similar threads

High School Does the Schrödinger Equation Imply a Deterministic Universe?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
High School Can we say a photon doesn't exist until the wavefunction collapses?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
High School Can someone please explain to me the motion of an electron?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Undergrad Is There A Study Showing The Observer Effect Ignoring Conscious Intent?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Undergrad Are electrons universal problem solvers?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
Undergrad Number of qubits needed to simulate the universe
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
Graduate Can particles appear and disappear "with" a cause?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
High School Quantum entanglement and simultaneity
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Undergrad How non-conscious can an Observer be and cause wave function collapse?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
9K
Undergrad Phase and group velocity for the wave function
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K