Understanding MWI in Quantum Physics

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter durant35
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mwi
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum physics, specifically focusing on the assumptions regarding the existence of multiple universes and the concept of universe splitting. Participants explore the implications of decoherence and how it relates to macroscopic and microscopic phenomena, including examples like Schrödinger's cat and the localization of objects such as the moon and a cell phone.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about when and how universe splitting occurs in MWI, particularly in relation to decoherence and its effects on macroscopic objects.
  • One participant suggests that the "split" happens when a microscopic change is amplified to create a macroscopic difference, using the example of an electron and a detector measuring its spin.
  • Another participant states that after decoherence, each outcome is interpreted as a separate world, and emphasizes that decoherence happens so quickly that it is often considered irrelevant to the discussion.
  • Concerns are raised about the vagueness of the concept of decoherence, with one participant questioning what superpositions are destroyed during the process and how continuous decoherence affects the localization of objects.
  • Some participants request real-life examples to clarify the concept of decoherence and its implications for everyday objects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the clarity and implications of decoherence in MWI. While some find the explanation straightforward, others struggle with the conceptual understanding and seek further clarification. No consensus is reached on the specifics of how decoherence operates in practice.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the rapid nature of decoherence makes it difficult to observe superpositions, leading to uncertainty about the practical implications of the theory. There is also mention of the need for a deeper understanding of the modern interpretations based on histories.

durant35
Messages
292
Reaction score
11
Hey guys,

I want to understand the basic assumptions of MWI in quantum physics. So one of it is that all possible states exist in different universes, and that's relatively understandable although weird. Now my problem is the splitting of the universes and how and when does it happen.

Example 1) Schrödinger's cat. In normal circumstances the decoherence occurs at the detector and we observe only one outcome. MWI says that both possibilities exist, just in different universes, continuously, so when and how does the splitting occur, are possibilities already split per se so that a cat is let's say alive in our universe and dead in another?

Example 2) Macroscopic localization
The good old is the moon there when nobody looks question. In normal circumstances and if we regard that this universe is the only one that is real, due to decoherence the moon is there or thereabout at any instant, it is highly localized. So this is a bit different than Schrödinger's cat, MWI would assume that the Moon can be at any location in the universe (of course one location per universe), so how does this follow from decoherence which gives moon a constant location through time (e.g. there was no situation where the moon was spread through space and then "collapsed" to a definite position in our universe leaving other options to realize in another universe)

Your suggestions are welcome. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
durant35 said:
Hey guys,

I want to understand the basic assumptions of MWI in quantum physics. So one of it is that all possible states exist in different universes, and that's relatively understandable although weird. Now my problem is the splitting of the universes and how and when does it happen.

There is no precise moment that a split happens. In MWI, there is a wave function for the whole universe, and it just evolves smoothly. But a "split" is considered to happen when a microscopic change is amplified to make a macroscopic difference.

For example, let's consider a tiny little universe consisting of nothing but an electron and a detector. The electron has a property, spin (in the z-direction, for concreteness), which can have two possible values: spin-up or spin-down. The detector measures the spin, and either prints out a message saying "spin up" or prints out a message saying "spin down". Suppose that initially, the electron is in a superposition of spin-up and spin-down.

Before the measurement, the detector is in a state, "waiting for results" and the electron is in a state "superposition of spin-up and spin-down".
After the measurement, the entire universe is in a superposition of
  1. A state in which the detector printed out "spin up" and the electron is in the spin-up state, and
  2. A state in which the detector printed out "spin down" and the electron is in the spin-down state.
Speaking informally, the single detector has "split" into two possible states, or alternative worlds. But all that has really happened is that there already was a superposition--the electron was in a superposition. That superposition then "infected" the detector, to put it into a superposition, as well.

So the "split" just means that the superpositions have started making a difference to macroscopic objects.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
durant35 said:
I want to understand the basic assumptions of MWI in quantum physics. So one of it is that all possible states exist in different universes, and that's relatively understandable although weird. Now my problem is the splitting of the universes and how and when does it happen.

Its easy.

After decoherence you have the mixed state where each outcome occurs with a certain probability. Instead of only one outcome happening each is interpreted as a separate world and everything continues to evolve - no collapse - no nothing.

Now don't get aught up in what's going on during decoherene - it happens so fast its irrelevant.

If you want to go down that path you will need to study the modern version based on histories:
www.amazon.com/The-Emergent-Multiverse-according-Interpretation/dp/0198707541

Thanks
Bill
 
bhobba said:
Its easy.

After decoherence you have the mixed state where each outcome occurs with a certain probability. Instead of only one outcome happening each is interpreted as a separate world and everything continues to evolve - no collapse - no nothing.

Now don't get aught up in what's going on during decoherene - it happens so fast its irrelevant.

If you want to go down that path you will need to study the modern version based on histories:
www.amazon.com/The-Emergent-Multiverse-according-Interpretation/dp/0198707541

Thanks
Bill

Well, as you know, this issue about decoherence time has been my biggest obstacle in understanding it all together. When someone says 'it happens so fast that we cannot observe superpositions' that seems pretty vague to me. I understand how theoretically it turns a superposition into a mixed state, but practically I still don't. In a sense that the objects around us seem already decohered, but decoherence is actually still happening, so I don't understand what superpositions are destroyed through the process. Or to state it better, does continuous decoherence manage to keep objects at an almost precise location all the time and the only superpositions that get 'destroyed' are the range of nearby microscopical locations of the object near the object. Theoretically as I say this all seems fine but decoherence as a process in objects that already seem decohered seems fuzzy.
 
durant35 said:
When someone says 'it happens so fast that we cannot observe superpositions' that seems pretty vague to me.

Then I, and I suspect anyone else, can't help you. It utterly simple, but if you don't get it - shrug.

Thanks
Bill
 
bhobba said:
Then I, and I suspect anyone else, can't help you. It utterly simple, but if you don't get it - shrug.

Thanks
Bill

You've tried to help and I learned a lot from you, but there still exists a conceptual barierre. If somebody could give me a real life example or analyze mine that would be great.

For instance I am observing my cell phone and decoherence is occurring constantly, so what superpositions I don't see or what superpositions are destroyed? As I see it, my phone is constantly spreading in space by a tiny amount but decoherence continuously localizes it. I know that may be too simple but I would like to elaborate it with you.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
5K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 108 ·
4
Replies
108
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 117 ·
4
Replies
117
Views
13K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
6K