SchroedingersGhost

Unregistered less info

220 reputation

bio	website
	location
	age
visits	member for	1 year, 8 months
	seen	May 28 '12 at 14:37
stats	profile views	77

	220 reputation	bio	website		visits	member for	1 year, 8 months
18 badges		location			seen	May 28 '12 at 14:37

summary answers questions tags badges favorites bounties reputation activity

50 Actions

suggestions reviews revisions comments badges posts accepts all

Mar 9	awarded	Nice Question
Jan 14	awarded	Popular Question
Sep 7	awarded	Yearling
May 2	revised	Worlds branching or diverging in Many-Worlds Interpretation? added 1 characters in body
May 2	asked	Worlds branching or diverging in Many-Worlds Interpretation?
Feb 13	accepted	Why is Gleason's Theorem not enough to obtain Born Rule in Many Worlds Interpretation?
Feb 12	awarded	Promoter
Feb 10	comment	Why is Gleason's Theorem not enough to obtain Born Rule in Many Worlds Interpretation? thanks for the edits, now if only someone would respond
Feb 10	comment	Why is Gleason's Theorem not enough to obtain Born Rule in Many Worlds Interpretation? But Wallace et al employ decision-theoretic apporoach, there exist nearly countless amounts of criticism towards that approach. But I can't find the same slamdunks against Gleason
Feb 10	comment	Why is Gleason's Theorem not enough to obtain Born Rule in Many Worlds Interpretation? Don't really know what else I can add other than a wiki link
Feb 10	revised	Why is Gleason's Theorem not enough to obtain Born Rule in Many Worlds Interpretation? added 48 characters in body
Feb 10	asked	Why is Gleason's Theorem not enough to obtain Born Rule in Many Worlds Interpretation?
Jan 18	awarded	Popular Question
Jan 17	comment	How can indeterminacy in quantum mechanics be derived from lack of ability to observe a cause? Where is the rest of the ensemble? are you talkin about MWI?
Dec 21	asked	Deterministic quantum mechanics
Dec 13	accepted	Heisenberg picture saves locality in QM?
Dec 4	asked	Heisenberg picture saves locality in QM?
Dec 4	comment	Consequences of the new theorem in QM? Aha! :) Could you elaborate a little on this sentence: "if you prune wavefunction branches without Bohmian particles, you get predictions different from QM." ?
Dec 4	comment	Consequences of the new theorem in QM? What do you mean serious alternative? I mean the Born Rule (universally valid, regardless of interpretations) that gives us the probabilities in QM. Did you mean Bohm?
Dec 3	comment	Consequences of the new theorem in QM? Thanks a lot. Obviously this is also why Bohmians say they derive the Born Rule rather than postulating it. What are your thoughts on MWI vs Bohm? Also how do you avoid the "empty branches" from giving rise to worlds (functionalism) ?