- #1
naima
Gold Member
- 938
- 54
Hi PF
I am reading this paper and this one.
Zurek insists on the fact that pointer states emerge when the same information is imprinted in a huge number of disjoint subsystems of the environment.
Many observers can read those informations and agree with the others.
He never tells what this information is about. He do not says that the observers read a definite output of the measurement.
He says also that after decoherence a collapse of the wave function is not necessary because collapse allready occured.
Do you understand what he really thinks. Copenhague Interpretation has a collapse axiom. He proposes another interpretation, What is his counterpart here?
I am reading this paper and this one.
Zurek insists on the fact that pointer states emerge when the same information is imprinted in a huge number of disjoint subsystems of the environment.
Many observers can read those informations and agree with the others.
He never tells what this information is about. He do not says that the observers read a definite output of the measurement.
He says also that after decoherence a collapse of the wave function is not necessary because collapse allready occured.
Do you understand what he really thinks. Copenhague Interpretation has a collapse axiom. He proposes another interpretation, What is his counterpart here?