3
$\begingroup$

Is there any experiment conducted to prove Many world interpretation of Quantum mechanics?

If it can't be proved why we should take MWI seriously? Recently I read some papers of Max Tegmark who is an advocate of MWI and avoids the lack of experimental prove.

I think this is the same question as mine.

What about the two arxiv papers this and this?

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Generally QM interpretations are just that - philosophical ascriptions of ideas to quantities that appear in the theory. By definition they are not testable, because QM is QM and it makes the same predictions no matter what interpretation you like. What many-worlds formulation do you have in mind that could even be considered testable? $\endgroup$ – user10851 Feb 6 '14 at 5:23
  • $\begingroup$ What would you say about Max Tegmark when he says many worlds are as real as QM? @ChrisWhite $\endgroup$ – Self-Made Man Feb 6 '14 at 5:26
  • $\begingroup$ I can't understand your point. @AsphirDom $\endgroup$ – Self-Made Man Feb 6 '14 at 13:50
  • $\begingroup$ My point is that many worlds idea is not coming from physics and Max Tegmark DOES not know logic which is higher knowledge than any physics. That's why many physical theories are based on the principle of causality. $\endgroup$ – Asphir Dom Feb 6 '14 at 14:05
  • $\begingroup$ So, what would you say there is no other worlds besides ours? @AsphirDom $\endgroup$ – Self-Made Man Feb 6 '14 at 14:20
5
$\begingroup$

MWI does not predict anything which could differentiate it from other interpretations of quantum mechanics. Otherwise it would be called theory rather than interpretation. The question of choosing particular interpretation is philosophical rather than scientific. If you dislike MWI you likely to choose another interpretation which would be similarly unprovable.

The main advantages of MWI are that it extends the area of applicability of the usual laws of quantum mechanics, and postulates that there are no distinguished observers.

The main disadvantage is that it postulates the existence of unobservable entities, far exceeding the observable domain.

It is also objectively deterministic but subjectively indeterministic, compared to totally deterministic Bohm mechanics interpretation and objectively indeterministic Copenhagen interpretation.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This is the real problem with MWI. It way misleads the philo-dudes. $\endgroup$ – Jani Kovacs Feb 6 '14 at 14:55
1
$\begingroup$

Hermetically contained parallel universes are one/observer. Given leakage, one suspects gravitation leaks first. The Hubble deep field denies universal gravitational lensing distortions. Anything can be explained by curve-fitting. Science begins with the arrival of falsifiable prediction. Recently in the lay literature,

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2014/02/04/are-parallel-universes-unscientific-nonsense-insider-tips-for-criticizing-the-multiverse/#comment-12281

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Is there any experiment conducted to prove Many world interpretation of Quantum mechanics?

Not that I know of, but Max Tegmark did propose an experiment that would prove the Many Worlds Interpretation to be the right one.

It is described on page 5 of this publication (thanks to @JoshuaLin in this question):

enter image description here

The only caveat is, that it would be hard to obtain consensus within the physics community.

$\endgroup$

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.