Many worlds is not deterministic in every single universe, it is in all possible universes. In you want to simulate a single universe you are bound by stochasticity
-
-
Replying to @Gaybriele_
No, the MWI is fully deterministic because it incorporates the theory of the universal wavefunction. As such, there is no distinction in rules between a single universe and all possible universes.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
It's still impossible to predict deterministic ally the way a single universe will evolve
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Gaybriele_
There's no rule in MWI that states that at all. I suggest you read this as it will give you a better insight into determinism and MWI. https://www.uh.edu/engines/epi2630.htm …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
You might want to read this http://www.informationphilosopher.com/freedom/determinism.html …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AyrshireBog
I'm sorry, but the writer of that piece, whoever he is, doesn't know what he is talking about. I presume he is not a quantum physicist. Please, read this, an academic paper by an actual quantum physicist: https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9412005.pdf …
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @AyrshireBog
It is just a common myth that quantum physics is incompatible with determinism. Bohm's theory, Cranmer's theory, the hidden variable theory -- all are potential ways of reconciling the two.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
There are a number of interpretations of QM, of course including De Broglie/Bohm and MWs, some of which are deterministic and most of which aren't. As yet there has been nothing decisive (that I've seen) which settles the issue on the correct interpretation or determinism.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AyrshireBog
There is not a single interpretation of QM that refutes determinism. Even the most "stochastic" QM interpretations like Copenhagen are compatible with a deterministic worldview. Just because something appears random to us, doesn't mean it's not determined by something else.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @AyrshireBog
Do you know about Bell's theorem? The idea of hidden variables in QM has been disproven.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
No, it hasn't. Bell's Theorem suggests that *local* hidden variables are impossible, but does not address nonlocal hidden variables. Furthermore, it notoriously contains a loophole for absolute determinism (superdeterminism).
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.