Measurement problem and many worlds

In summary, the interference pattern is destroyed in case of MWI because the physicists are no longer looking at the same state.
  • #1
ripe90
4
0
Hello, sorry if I created new thread that is already open, but I did not find answer. I would like to ask you about measurement problem (double slit experiment) and many worlds. When interference pattern is created, the dot on screen just show us in which branch or world we are. But if we observe the path of the particle, pattern is changed. Does it means that the way of branching new worlds is also changed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It depends on how and when the path is measured. The 'branching' happens when a measurement occurs. If the path is measured before the dot is created on the screen, then a branching occurs earlier than it would in the alternative experiment in which path is not measured.

For practical reasons, I think that path-measuring will always require a measurement earlier than would occur in a non-path-marking approach, as long as we interpret 'measurement' broadly enough, and that includes delayed erasure setups. For instance in the Kim et al erasure experiment, the path is in a sense 'measured' as soon as the idler photon is split off, which is before the signal photon strikes the screen.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
  • #3
Thank you for your reply! I was just wondering why the interference pattern is destroyed in case of MWI - because MWI says that there is no wave function collapse. The experiment you send is very interesting, travel back in time :)
 
  • #4
Say there are n photons that have hit the screen (that's an oversimplification, because the number of photons striking the screen is itself a stochastic outcome, but I think we can ignore that for this purpose).

Then there are 2^n different combinations of which slits the photons have passed through. The wavefunction after the experiment is a superposition of 2^n states, in each of which there is a unique one of those 2^n choices of which slits the photons went through. In every one of those states there is a physicist looking at their screen, and seeing no interference pattern because the photons all came through definite slits and hence could not interfere.

Under MWI, there is no collapse, because all 2^n states are still components of the universal wavefunction. I think that, if we had an uber-physicist that could look at the superposition of all 2^n states, they would see interference. But there is no uber-physicist. By looking at the screen, the physicist becomes part of the system and hence each of the 2^n physicists is in one of the 2^n sub-states, and can only see the pattern of that sub-state.
 

Related to Measurement problem and many worlds

1. What is the measurement problem in quantum mechanics?

The measurement problem in quantum mechanics refers to the discrepancy between the deterministic nature of the theory and the probabilistic nature of measurement outcomes. It raises the question of how a quantum system can exist in multiple states simultaneously until it is observed and collapses into a single state.

2. What is the many-worlds interpretation?

The many-worlds interpretation is a theory proposed by Hugh Everett III that suggests the existence of multiple parallel universes, each containing a different outcome of every quantum measurement. It suggests that every possible outcome of a quantum event actually occurs in a different parallel universe.

3. How does the many-worlds interpretation attempt to solve the measurement problem?

The many-worlds interpretation solves the measurement problem by eliminating the need for wave function collapse. Instead, it suggests that all possible outcomes of a measurement exist in parallel universes, and the observer simply becomes entangled with one of these outcomes, giving the illusion of a single reality.

4. What are the criticisms of the many-worlds interpretation?

One of the main criticisms of the many-worlds interpretation is that it is untestable and therefore not a proper scientific theory. It also raises questions about what exactly constitutes a "measurement" and how these parallel universes interact with each other. Additionally, some argue that it violates Occam's razor by introducing an infinite number of unobservable parallel universes.

5. Are there any experiments that support or refute the many-worlds interpretation?

There are currently no experiments that definitively support or refute the many-worlds interpretation. Some argue that the theory is inherently untestable, while others suggest that further research and technological advancements may one day provide evidence for or against it. Currently, the interpretation remains a philosophical and theoretical concept rather than a scientifically proven theory.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
1
Views
416
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
11
Views
742
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
14
Views
990
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
7
Views
755
Back
Top