post by [deleted] · · ? · GW · 0 comments

This is a link post for

0 comments

Comments sorted by top scores.

comment by shminux · 2023-02-15T01:22:58.583Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

MWI, unlike the simulation "hypothesis" (a cute speculation, really), is at least theoretically testable by isolating progressively larger quantum systems until either we see objective collapse of some sort or can scale up to macroscopic size.

Replies from: 314159
comment by amelia (314159) · 2023-02-15T16:45:35.242Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Thanks for the feedback! To test the Many Worlds Interpretation, what would it look like to see objective collapse occurring? It seems tricky, because the moment we observe the photon(s), wouldn't they appear to have already collapsed? Please let me know if there are any books or papers you would recommend on the topic. Thx again!

Replies from: shminux
comment by shminux · 2023-02-16T04:28:49.104Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

You are right, it is very tricky! For example, if one follows Penrose and considers the proper time difference along the same worldline due to different entangled states curving the spacetime slightly differently being a cause of decoherence and therefore collapse of the wave function. The wiki writeup is at  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objective-collapse_theory. My personal guess is that if the Anton Zeilinger-type experiments are scaled up to the Planck masses (~10 microgram), we will either hit the decoherence limit or can be quite sure that objective collapse is not a thing.

Replies from: 314159
comment by amelia (314159) · 2023-02-18T02:18:27.466Z · LW(p) · GW(p)

Thank you! You've given me lots to think about and research!