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

The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

scottaaronson.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 170 posts

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#31

Post by goatlover »

layer8 wrote: post #29
_0w8t wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This does not explain how a classical observer gets probabilities that are precisely measured. In universe-as-a-wave-function there are no probabilities. So how exactly do they arise and what they mean?

My understanding is that this is just the law of large numbers. Most branches match the mathematical probabilities very closely, and hence that’s what we observe. Yes, people on one of the rare branches where things behave differently wouldn’t observe that, but we simply happen to not be on one of those rare branches.

So you’re endorsing Many Worlds with an appeal to the anthropic principle. That’s fine, but you do have to assume MWI is the true interpretation of the mathematical formalism.

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#32

Post by achrono »

jasonhansel wrote: post #30

> OK, but are the quantum states “ontic” (really out in the world), or “epistemic” (only in our heads)? Scott's answer to this seems like a cop-out. He's basically saying "I can't tell which things are epistemic or ontic, and this all seems very complicated, so I'm going to assume the distinction doesn't exist."

I actually thought it was good enough to get going, because wouldn't we then enter the rabbit hole of the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics? Only way out might be a Penrosian realm!

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#33

Post by howling »

In some sense, classical probability is just the study of category of Markov Kernels [0]. We can gain much of the insight without a lot of measure theory/functional analysis machineries by restricting to its full subcategory of finite states, which gets us to the category of stochastic matrix.

In this view, quantum probability (of finite states) is just about study of category of classical quantum maps described in Picturing Quantum Processes by Bob Coecke and Aleks Kissinger [1]. I highly recommend the book, which requires hardly any prerequisites other than linear algebra and mathematical maturity. Once we get into this framework, no philosophical interpretation is required. E.g. we can't reproduce a quantum state by classical data just means any morphism from a (non-trivial) purely quantum state to a purely classical state does not have a left inverse.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_kernel [1]: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/picturing-quantum-proce...

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#34

Post by layer8 »

goatlover wrote: post #31
layer8 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that this is just the law of large numbers. Most branches match the mathematical probabilities very closely, and hence that’s what we observe. Yes, people on one of the rare branches where things behave differently wouldn’t observe that, but we simply happen to not be on one of those rare branches.

So you’re endorsing Many Worlds with an appeal to the anthropic principle. That’s fine, but you do have to assume MWI is the true interpretation of the mathematical formalism.

All the other interpretations require additional assumptions on top of the mathematical formalism, hence MW seems the most plausible to me. The GP wrote “[in a] universe-as-a-wave-function”, which basically is the MWI.

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#35

Post by criddell »

LightMachine wrote: post #9
dilap wrote: post #6

This feels like a cop out. Like sure, you can just do the math and get results and not worry about it. But what's the motivation here? When you get down to it, he seems to believe many-worlds is true, BUT holds the philosophical position that you shouldn't, like, care. Because there's no practical benefit to caring; because it doesn't help you with the calculations. But, hey, I still care! What the real nature of rea…

And it is absurd to say it has no direct practical implications. We still don't know all of physics, and part of the reason is precisely because we're stuck in the wrong mindset regarding how nature works. Only a better insight on the true nature of the universe can give us the correct mathematical models.

> the correct mathematical models

There are those that think reality (including the universe) is just mathematics. Not modeled by mathematics, but is mathematics. To me, the mathematical universe hypothesis is starting to be the only theory that makes sense.

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#37

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

goatlover wrote: post #31
layer8 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that this is just the law of large numbers. Most branches match the mathematical probabilities very closely, and hence that’s what we observe. Yes, people on one of the rare branches where things behave differently wouldn’t observe that, but we simply happen to not be on one of those rare branches.

So you’re endorsing Many Worlds with an appeal to the anthropic principle. That’s fine, but you do have to assume MWI is the true interpretation of the mathematical formalism.

The Many-Worlds Interpretation is not really an interpretation. It just says that the known laws of Quantum Mechanics are correct, and that any measurement process itself has to obey the laws of Quantum Mechanics. In other words, nothing un-Quantum-Mechanical happens during measurement.

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#39

Post by astrange »

green_on_black wrote: post #12
_0w8t wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of Zen ideas is that thinking hides the true nature of the world since it is based on models and interpretations. So not doing interpretations is a step towards enlightenment.

"true nature" -- I'd say that this idea of a "true" nature (even existing) is quite arrogant.

A Zen response here would be to hit you on the head. Did that exist? If not, are you still going to complain about it?

Re: The Zen anti-interpretation of quantum mechanics (2021)

#40

Post by astrange »

sampo wrote: post #18
dools wrote: post #16

What I don't get is why people are more concerned with how Qauntum Mechanics works than they are with the way in which, for example, electro magenetic waves travel in a vacuum. Like we can "physically" understand how sound travels, and we can "visualise" that as a "mechanism" right? But we have no similar way of "physicalising" the way in which light travels, but no-one seems to have any trouble accepting that. Quant…

Quantum mechanics has wave function collapse, which is both essential in applying the theory to explain any physical situation, and at the same time not described by the theory. Other than "and then it collapses". Classical theories don't have this problem.

It’s also difficult to understand how chaotic systems are explained by quantum mechanics, although they must be.

And of course what gravity has to do with it.

Post reply on HN