Results 1 to 2 of 2
Like Tree2Likes
  • 1 Post By Alexander1304
  • 1 Post By Kerling

Thread: 'Many -Worlds' is the only valid intepretation and proven?

  1. #1 'Many -Worlds' is the only valid intepretation and proven? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Hello All,

    Recenlt I've read mostly about "many -worlds". As I understand, it is still not universally accepted interpretation, but there are some reports that certain experiments simply proved it, like Vaidman- Elitzur bomb test, Zelingher interferometer, vacuum etc, double- slit experiment, that electron seen to be both in 2 places (M.Kaku)...

    There are also reports that this interpretation was "mathematically" proven...

    So,I'm confused. Some people claim that these "wordls", if they exist, are by definition beyond human observatiion, other say that that these "worlds" were observed, still others claim that all data indicates these "worlds" can be explained without resorting to "many-worlds".

    What do You think of this article?:

    I've read personally, that S.Weinberg changed his position, and now regard every interpretation unsatisfactory, and somwhere I've read that S.Hawking also rejected MWI now...
    So,what is Your opinion on the above claims/article that MWI is proven?...

    Water Nosfim likes this.
    Reply With Quote  


  3. #2  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Well I'm afraid I am going to have to dissapoint you. Many world is just an interpretation, thought of around 1965 if I can remember correctly (and quite an impressive feat it was, even though I don't think it is the right answer)
    The solution thought of by Everett is basically a don't look don't tell solution. Instead of for instance the Copenhagen interpretation in which it is not defined what actually happens on a singular interval and that statistics is all we know. Many worlds just say that it all happens, but in different dimensions. However any quantum experiment (which is free from interpretation) is, and can only be done by consecutive measurements. Hence statistics. It is therefore very hard to proof interpretations wrong. However it did happen via the Kochen Specker Bell inequalities. Which proved that hidden variable theories cannot exist (in 3D at least, they can in 2D). Later the delayed choice experiment fucks up hidden variables even more.

    However there isn't yet such a tell tale experimental prediction that can or cannot preclude which of the other 2 major interpretations (many worlds or Copenhagen) is the correct one. After all, we cannot observe the other dimensions, hence cannot prove their existence.

    In my personal experience in dealing with quantum experimentation, theoretical reasoning and understanding. The Copenhagen interpretation was the most difficult to grasp. But once grasped it proved greatly superior to others. Not because it was most simple (in a sense everything becomes simple after a while) but because it made excellent and fast predictions possible. which result in truth. I don't have that with any worlds.

    The article is just about something we have known (theoretically) for years; there is no limit in size to the quantum state. There is just interactions to worry about.

    So what about Many Worlds theory? Though mathematically sound, and a beautiful piece of work. It remains Physically bad. Simply because it is intrinsically unobservable. Which makes it useless. Then I'd rather have an interpretation that only predicts what can be observed. After all, I don't worry about imagination.

    SpeedFreek likes this.
    Reply With Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 77
    Last Post: December 7th, 2012, 12:02 PM
  2. Is the Omega Point still a valid theory?
    By Ascended in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: July 4th, 2012, 03:45 PM
  3. another valid question
    By Brandon in forum Physics
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: September 15th, 2011, 04:43 PM
    By curious1 in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2010, 01:48 PM
  5. Replies: 33
    Last Post: October 22nd, 2009, 12:33 PM
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts