David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Everett demonstrates the appearance of collapse, within the context of the unitary linear dynamics. However, he does not state clearly how observers are to have determinate measurement records, hence 50 years of debate. This, however, is inherent. He defines the observer as the record of observations, which, naturally, is the record of correlations established with the physical environment. As in Rovelli's Relational Quantum Mechanics, the correlations record is the sole determinant of the effective physical environment, here the quantum mechanical frame of reference: due to multiple realisation of the functional identity of the observer, the physical environment is a simultaneity of all the physical environments in which it is instantiated, a 'universe superposition', in which only the environment correlated with the observer by observations is determinate. This effects a discrete and idiosyncratic physical environment for each version of an observer, in which determinate measurement records are recorded. Quantum mechanics is on this view fully relational, demonstrated as not only viable but necessary by Rovelli & Laudisa. The quantum mechanical frame of reference is Everett's 'Relative State', and on Tegmark's 'inside view', the time evolution follows the standard von Neumann-Dirac formulation. Thus observers get precisely the measurement records predicted by the standard formulation, but since objectively there is only the appearance of collapse, there is neither a measurement problem nor a disparity with relativity. The linear dynamics and the collapse dynamics are directly experienced, as the passage of time and the making of observations, respectively.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Andrew Soltau, Universe Superposition, Relational Quantum Mechanics, and the Reality of the No-Collapse Universe.
Andrew Soltau, Times Two: The Tenses of Linear and Collapse Dynamics in Relational Quantum Mechanics.
C. Lehner (1997). What It Feels Like to Be in a Superposition, and Why: Consciousness and the Interpretation of Everett's Quantum Mechanics. Synthese 110 (2):191-216.
Jeffrey Barrett, Everett's Relative-State Formulation of Quantum Mechanics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Matthew J. Brown (2009). Relational Quantum Mechanics and the Determinacy Problem. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (4):679-695.
Christoph Lehner (1997). What It Feels Like to Be in a Superposition. And Why. Synthese 110 (2):191-216.
Michel Bitbol, Physical Relations or Functional Relations ? A Non-Metaphysical Construal of Rovelli's Relational Quantum Mechanics.
J. R. Lucas (1995). Prospects for Realism in Quantum Mechanics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 9 (3):225 – 234.
I. I. I. Durand (1960). On the Theory of Measurement in Quantum Mechanical Systems. Philosophy of Science 27 (2):115-133.
Jeffrey A. Barrett (1994). The Suggestive Properties of Quantum Mechanics Without the Collapse Postulate. Erkenntnis 41 (2):233 - 252.
Jeffrey A. Barrett (1996). Empirical Adequacy and the Availability of Reliable Records in Quantum Mechanics. Philosophy of Science 63 (1):49-64.
Jeffrey A. Barrett (2005). Relativistic Quantum Mechanics Through Frame-Dependent Constructions. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):802-813.
Added to index2010-09-15
Total downloads16 ( #106,421 of 1,099,719 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #186,613 of 1,099,719 )
How can I increase my downloads?