8 replies to this topic

[A941]

Is the MWI something which should be taken literally, or is it just an easier way to calculate the outcomes?
Are there really tons of other slightly different Universes out there, or just ours?
What do you think about the MWI in general?

[Absent]

Well it's not something anyone can really know for sure as it is making a lot of assumptions, especially about consciousness.

From what I understand it's not about physical universes. To understand this you have to understand Einsteins understanding of time, in which that time is not really time as we know it. That future, past, present all exist in one moment, literally. That theoretically we are everywhere at every point in time at all times, just, our consciousness is fixated in this moment. Though even this is a vast oversimplification. Einstein understood very deeply about the nature of time, things that he could not publicly come out and talk about because they are borderline spiritual/unproveable with any sort of actual experiment at the time. The problem with the quantum physics world is there are majorly different schools of thought with different groups of people disagreeing on various theories, such as the one above.

The idea is that there is a different time line for every single possible decision that could have ever be made, and of course every decision effects the world in a different way which leads to a different chain of events and a different chain of decisions. What you have with this theory is an theoretically infinite number of possible timelines of differing conscious decisions throughout history, etc. I can't really really come close to actually defining it as it's beyond any words.

You could go even deeper to say that all of these possible worlds and realms are sitting on top of each other and interpenetrating each other, but do not come in contact with each other and are separated by certain phenomena. Spiritualist might say this is where the whole "different vibrations" separating the different universes come into play. Theoretically it is possible to shift between these realms naturally if you can find certain anomalies that occur. A mathematically viable theory, but probably incredibly far to rare to test. There are theories of governments working on various quantum technologies to shift between these realms and what not, but again, indeterminable by the common man.

I suggest, that if you really want to get somewhat of an understanding of these multiworld theories, then to study up on the calculus behind a lot of this quantum mechanics, as well as looking into the various conspiracies theories of governments, secret projects, aliens, and what not. Hearing accounts of what conspiracy theorist say have happened and comparing them to what quantum mechanics says it possible can lead to some very interesting realizations of what might have actually happened. After all, there must be a grain of truth somewhere in all of these many conspiracies.

[xEva]

Siro, how do you know what Einstein thought about time? And what conspiracy theories have to do with all this?


A941, I have difficulty with MWI. My problem with it is that it violates the conservation of energy laws, i.e. it implies that a new version of the world springs up into existence at each and every step where things could go either way. Where does all that energy come from?

The origins of MWI lie with the Copenhagen interpretation of the quantum theory. The Copenhagen interpretation was adapted as a convention, an agreement of "looking at things" that could not be known with certainty, in a particular way -- as if a quantum system indeed existed in a superimposed state of all possible states, including the mutually exclusive ones, until the measurement "collapses" it and a particular outcome is "realized". But in reality, I believe only one state exists, albeit unknown, and this one preexisting state manifests upon the "measurement".

IMO contemporary physics is in deep trouble. Theories abound and many people, physicists and laymen alike, take some of those theories literally. I don't.

Edited by xEva, 23 November 2013 - 12:24 AM.

[Absent]

Einstein had a lot to say about the true nature of time, outside of his theory of relativity. You can find many quotes online. If you really wish to understand the nature behind what I was saying, then I suggest you study not only his theory of relativity but the calculus and ideology behind his attempts at a unified field theory, as well as some of his successors who have made attempts at finishing it. It is not something I can put in any simple words.

Conspiracy theories have a lot to do with it. The multiple worlds interpretation has in fact many different angles of looking at it, depending on who you are asking. The specific nature of it cannot be pinpointed as it is merely a theory. If we understood every single aspect of the theory down to a pinpoint, then we could likely use it to our advantage in traversing other universes. The mathematics only really reveal the fact that such a theory does hold some credence in suggesting that other worlds exist. This is, after all, theoretical physics. Until we can transition some of these theories from theoretical physics to experimental physics, there's not much we can do with them, allowing for flexibility in how these things are looked at.

With conspiracies.... I only suggested that as there have been many proven credible ex-government scientist who have come out and revealed declassified information that they were allowed to talk about. As well as many not so credible individuals. The only reason the uncredible individuals are to be considered is because some of the technicalities of their stories pair up with some of the credible sources. The reason you don't hear about a lot of these people is because most of what they are saying cannot be validated, even if they are a credible individuals. Especially given the fact that much of what they have come out and told is from 20-30 years ago. Credible Individuals + Unbelievable Facts + Little Evidence = not much reaction from the media/society. Among many of the claims that have been made by such individuals are claims that the US Government has successfully transported people into the past, as well into bubble/bridge universes. There also exist credible US Govt. Engineers who claim some Alien Crafts and Alien Species have the technology to shift frequencies and enter other dimensions.

The above is just a brief overview of the claims some of these people have made. The reason I have mentioned them in this topic is because even though these claims cannot be verified, considering them as factual could shed light onto possible ways of looking at the MWI. I don't think it is totally out of the ball park considering many of them are made by credible people. The suggestion to look at them was more for the OP to help him get a certain understanding of the theory. While I am a person who is naturally interested in conspiracies, I have found many correlations between my interest in these theories and my interest in theoretical physics.

Edited by Siro, 23 November 2013 - 12:58 AM.

[Clifford Greenblatt]

The relative state formulation developed by Hugh Everett III is not about many universes, but about one universe for which all of its possible histories are real. Hugh Everett admitted that the number of branches in the universal wave function of his theory is an uncountable infinity. On the other hand, multiverse theory truly is about many universes. It is not about any universe having multiple real histories, but is about an infinite number of universes exploding into existence through quantum mechanical fluctuations in an infinite sea of virtual particles. Even without considering the existence of an infinite sea of virtual particles, the sea of virtual particles in one universe alone would, theoretically, eventually produce a new universe through quantum mechanical fluctuations.

[xEva]

lol one universe for which all of its possible histories are real -- what is that supposed to mean? I mean really, please show it on an example of a human life. Consider a universe where your both broke a leg and did not, had a child and not, lived till 90 and died in a car crash at 18. I think a good physics theory should not only explain the inner workings of "things" but also resonate with our own experience.

...it ... is about an infinite number of universes exploding into existence through quantum mechanical fluctuations in an infinite sea of virtual particles. Even without considering the existence of an infinite sea of virtual particles, the sea of virtual particles in one universe alone would, theoretically, eventually produce a new universe through quantum mechanical fluctuations.

See, I also have a problem with these "particles", cause I know intuitively that precise trajectories of each and every molecule of air inside --or outside-- of an air balloon have no influence on its shape or its state. It is the summary of their action that matters. This air balloon analogy goes in contrast of MWI where, essentially, each "particle" apparently not only matters more than an individual in human society but becomes a source of a whole new universe each time it is faced with a choice to go this way or that.

And then put yourself in the shoes of God. If either version of MWI was true, how would you come up with all the necessary materials to implement such a world? The idea implies infinite source of energy. It is so crazy that I better stop here before I hurt someone's feelings

Edited by xEva, 23 November 2013 - 06:43 PM.

[Clifford Greenblatt]

xEva-

I do not agree with the MWI theory, but I just gave a simple description of what it means. Hugh Everett's admission that the universal wave function has an uncountable infinity of branches eliminates it as a valid theory.

I am risking misconception here, as my background in quantum mechanics is weak, but I think the total energy in a multiverse is zero, as it contains both positive and negative energy which add up to zero energy. Virtual particles are discussed in Wikipedia.

Although multiverse theory makes sense to me as a physical theory, I do not believe that reality is limited to the things that are accessible to physical investigation. The fact that the phenomenon of conscious experience has no physical explanation is very good evidence for this. In an infinite multiverse, our lives would be repeated an infinite number of times to any arbitrarily fine precision. However, since our lives are not just physical, but have a profound spiritual dimension to them, I could not trust any physical theory to provide the most important explanation of our future and what our lives are really about.

[BrandonFlorida]

The MWI is advanced as one possible explanation for the probabilistic nature of the world, as shown in quantum mechanics. It is intended to be literal, but since these universes are mutually unobservable, there is no clear idea of how to look for them. The Copenhagen Interpretation is a different, alternate explanation.

[wigglywinks]

It's one possible interpretation of quantum mechanics, I can't say if it's correct or not because there isn't any experimental evidence (nobody has ever found testable predictions in the MWI), but in my opinion it's the simplest interpretation, and in the history of physics, the simplest hypothesises are the ones that end up being correct. 

 

When I say "simple", what I mean is mathematical and logical simplicity, it's not intuitively simple. It doesn't include unnecessary postulates like what the Copenhagen interpretations have (the postulates are kind of like the axioms of quantum mechanics from which the entire theory is derived from), and there are arguments you can make to say that the pilot wave interpretation (deBroglie-Bohm interpretation) is actually just MWI in disguise. 

 

Arguably, the big problem with the MWI though is that the mathematical formulation can't derive the Born rule. For those who don't know, the Born rule is a simple rule for calculating probabilities in quantum mechanics. Although there's a result called Gleason's theorem (look it up on wikipedia, I can't post links) which proves that the Born rule is actually just a consequence of the mathematical setting in which quantum mechanics is formulated in, so you could argue that there's no need for the MWI to reproduce the Born rule because of this theorem.

 

There are also literally hundreds of other interpretations that people have formulated over the years, but most of them are re-formulations of other interpretations.