especially since what we know abt quantum effects is that they overwhelmingly cancel out
-
-
into a singular "most likely" and indeed deterministic universe at the macro scale
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
the question of whether "possible worlds" actually "exist" pre-dates quantum physics
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
and imo it's fairly independent of it
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
modal realism isn't necessary for the MWI and the MWI doesn't support it as much as ppl think
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
like if you were to ask me my opinion of real-world human-scale probability I'd take the
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Bayesian view - there is only one thing that actually is going to happen
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
That's what I mean, though. The Bayesian view would seem to contradict quantum reality.
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @ebdibit @arthur_affect and
It's the most intuitive interpretation, but it contradicts the behavior of a quantum
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @ebdibit @arthur_affect and
system prior to wavefunction collapse, which is dependent very much on the distribution
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes
but the collapse ends up being deterministic bc the thing that causes the collapse is
-
-
i.e. the outside macro scale world, the experimenter in the lab
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
which is a paradox, yes, bc the entire outside world is also made of waveforms
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.