Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
1–10 of 44 posts
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#2I can tell when I don't truly understand something by my ability to disagree, or make counter arguments. In this case it sounds reasonable -- that the probability distributions of the quantum scale somehow cohere because of a Darwinian mechanism. But if you told me, oh, actually the center of mass of the probability distributions is perceived as the real location, that makes sense too.
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#3Damn I feel stupid.
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#4Really good article but I’m unconvinced about those pointer states. The classicly observed values simply have overwhelmingly higher probability.
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#5Zurek explaining some of it @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27zMdaBgt6g
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#6Damn I feel stupid.
Don't. I just got my PhD (working on quantum computing at a good school) and I do not really get the point they are making. It is interesting, but esoteric even for people working in related fields.
However, it is a great opportunity to start learning more about it!
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#7Damn I feel stupid.
Don't. I just got my PhD (working on quantum computing at a good school) and I do not really get the point they are making. It is interesting, but esoteric even for people working in related fields. However, it is a great opportunity to start learning more about it!
My comment isn't useful, but I really can't get a handle on anything "quantum" related. The only thing I sort of understand is that if you could entangle a massive amount of photons/electrons, you could have "quantum radar" which would be jam-proof.
I don't really understand even that though. Could you verify an electron reflecting back is entangled with an electron you have on hand, or are they all just "entangled" with something or "entangled" with some spin (which could be replicated)?
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#8Here's a rebuttal from a physicist https://motls.blogspot.com/2019/07/quanta-magazines-anti-qua...
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#9I don't know if the analogy to darwinian evolution makes much sense, it seems to me that it makes more sense to see this as a way of error-correcting our reality, that is to say quantum phenomenon occur because anything else would cause a severe inconsistency.
Re: Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests
#10> possible only because pointer states of quantum objects exist
I knew it was pointers! So observation is the universe's GC? I feel better knowing that life is here at least to collapse enough wave functions to keep things humming along nicely. (Ever wake up and feel that you must have been stopped-and-copied over the night??)