Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Experiments spell doom for physical-collapse explanation of quantum weirdness

quantamagazine.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–306 of 306 posts

Re: Experiments spell doom for physical-collapse explanation of quantum weirdness

#301

Post by sebastialonso »

naasking wrote: post #106
GoblinSlayer wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discovery of non-linearity in the evolution operator would falsify MWI. Like e.g. this germanium experiment gave a positive result.

Yes, because it falsifies every interpretation of quantum mechanics not just MWI itself. I think in context here, "is superdeterminism falsifiable" is as silly a question as "is logic falsifiable" or "is causality falsifiable". Specific mmathematical, causal or superdeterministic models are always falsifiable, but the idea that superdeterminism as a whole is not falsifiable should be no more surprising or interesting…

> Specific mmathematical, causal or superdeterministic models are always falsifiable

I request further elaboration here, please. Examples would be great.

> than the fact that logic is not falsifiable

What?

Re: Experiments spell doom for physical-collapse explanation of quantum weirdness

#302

Post by The5thElephant »

dilap wrote: post #292
The5thElephant wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consciousness does influence the universe by being part of it. That's why we have the illusion of choice within the context of each moment rather than some meta-alien's perspective. But no it can't defeat determinism if that's what you meant. I believe someone called that idea "quantum immortality" and I find it conceptually interesting if not somewhat terrifying. However it does seem like the inevitable conclusion o…

> Consciousness does influence the universe... I'm not sure I'm following the argument. Let me phrase it this way: can you devise an experiment which will determine if a given entity is conscious? > I believe someone called that idea "quantum immortality" (Thanks for the term; I'd heared the idea expressed before, but not that phrase.) Skimming the wikipedia page, I didn't find any of the counter-arguments to be part…

> can you devise an experiment which will determine if a given entity is conscious?

No, without being able to define what consciousness is we can't make an experiment to test for it. The simplest explanation in my view is that qualia are a base "element" of the universe and information systems and our consciousness is a loosely drawn subset of qualia associated with our brain/body's information system. To be clear this is not dualism, the qualia are not some magical thing riding on top of physics and cannot change the path of particles from their physically determined routes.

Regarding quantum immortality I don't know if it necessarily demands a universe in which some form of every person lives forever by some unexpected chance of quantum improbability. At least in terms of a continuity of normal life it may be that the probability of a person living longer than a human body physically can is zero. However some have argued there is a non-zero chance that random quantum fluctuations could lead to brief instances of a person arising from "nothingness" anywhere and anytime in the universe, and some of those persons could by pure luck happen to match the mind of a person elsewhere. However this does start getting into the realm of silliness and quantum randomness and infinite universes allowing for literally every possible combination of particles.

Re: Experiments spell doom for physical-collapse explanation of quantum weirdness

#303

Post by dilap »

The5thElephant wrote: post #302
dilap wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Consciousness does influence the universe... I'm not sure I'm following the argument. Let me phrase it this way: can you devise an experiment which will determine if a given entity is conscious? > I believe someone called that idea "quantum immortality" (Thanks for the term; I'd heared the idea expressed before, but not that phrase.) Skimming the wikipedia page, I didn't find any of the counter-arguments to be part…

> can you devise an experiment which will determine if a given entity is conscious? No, without being able to define what consciousness is we can't make an experiment to test for it. The simplest explanation in my view is that qualia are a base "element" of the universe and information systems and our consciousness is a loosely drawn subset of qualia associated with our brain/body's information system. To be clear th…

Well, I'm not sure how you square that definition(ish) of consciousness w/ the claim that consciousness can influence the universe. Because, how?

Yeah, intuitively somehow it seems absurd to think that "everything possible is happening", somewhere, in some dimension. It almost feels like a modern version of Zenos paradox. Like, in the limit, there are no universes in which you're alive...

Re: Experiments spell doom for physical-collapse explanation of quantum weirdness

#304

Post by Iwan-Zotow »

addaon wrote: post #104
markisus wrote: post #101

This tidbit about a prodigious undergraduate struck me. He double majored in math and physics and was about to start his PhD at Harvard. And in a sudden freak accident he was gone from existence. The universe will always remain unfathomable in some ways. > In 1996, Qijia Fu of Hamilton College in New York — then just an undergraduate — proposed using germanium-based neutrino experiments to detect a CSL signature of X…

Reminds me of a golden age (?) science fiction short story -- no idea the author or name -- about a spate of suicides and mysterious deaths among physicists who got too close to "the truth," externally caused by an alien force trying to keep humans in their petri dish.

Something like that was written by Strugatsky Brothers

Only it was not aliens but Universe (Sub)conscious - Homeostasis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitely_Maybe_(novel)

Re: Experiments spell doom for physical-collapse explanation of quantum weirdness

#305

Post by Iwan-Zotow »

HALtheWise wrote: post #126
abecedarius wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an Asimov story whose title I forget. The truth in question was a defense against nuclear bombs.

Breeds There a Man...? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breeds_There_a_Man...%3F

A&B Strugatsky wrote something similar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitely_Maybe_(novel)

Re: Experiments spell doom for physical-collapse explanation of quantum weirdness

#306

Post by Iwan-Zotow »

masteranza wrote: post #214

This article is a perfect example how science is getting led into dark areas by people who didn't learn quantum mechanics right or people who pretend to understand it, but can only blindly follow the formalism without much understanding of what they actually do. Every such article continuous to mysticize the whole subject by quoting famous scientists who were either puzzled by it at the time or scientists like John v…

> John von Neumann who clearly gave a dumbed down view of the now called collapse (perhaps on request to skip the math)

there is nothing "dumbed down" in the John von Neumann book "Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics"

Post reply on HN