If you're a scientist that subscribes to the many worlds theorem, does that mean you do not accept wave particle duality? Seeing as MW postulates that the wave or particle form has always existed that way in your world (If I understood it correctly)


No, there is no logical dependence on the two. Recall that particle wave duality existed long before the Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Relative to that interpretation the wave and the particle acquire specific meaning but they existence of duality is not dependent on, nor does it require, the Copenhagen view of QM. Particles and Waves were two competing paradigms for describing phenomena that go way back. I say competing since we usually say, based on experience, that something is either a particle or a wave. In fact the "things" to which we attribute these behaviors have proven us wrong. Each is an abstraction based on our experiences. Duality means that the "things" we play with can behave in both ways and there was not reason to choose one paradigm over the other. Now the two views are seen as complementary rather than competing.

  • $\begingroup$ I believe the OP suggests the wave does not exist if you consider it spread among many worlds. $\endgroup$ – Exocytosis May 9 at 15:13
  • $\begingroup$ What is "the wave". waves exist in each world. If you mean the wave function that is a different story perhaps but rejecting the existence of one based on an interpretation is illogical. It is the interpretation that does not survive. $\endgroup$ – ggcg May 9 at 15:16
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks! That makes sense, so it just describes a motion or state that we dont understand in our "real world" $\endgroup$ – Sam Karlsson May 9 at 15:23
  • $\begingroup$ Wave effects are due to amplitude wave functions, so if wave functions are not representing a probability inside one world but a distribution among worlds, there is no wave in one single world I suppose. But I would like to OP to give more details about what they mean. $\endgroup$ – Exocytosis May 9 at 15:28
  • $\begingroup$ I agree but again, that only means that the Copenhagen view of the meaning of this dies. One can develop a many worlds view in which, in each world, there are dualistic objects that have particle properties and wave properties. $\endgroup$ – ggcg May 9 at 15:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.