[ExI] Criticisms of Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI)

[efc at swisscows.email]

Thank you Bill! Seems like the AI and I are in agreement. However, neither 
the AI nor I are the most up to date, so maybe we missed something.

Do you know when its training data stopped?

Best regards,
Daniel


On Thu, 14 Sep 2023, BillK via extropy-chat wrote:

> I thought it would be useful to get a summary of the MWI objections,
> so I asked around in the AI members club. All the responses were
> fairly similar, so I have copied the answer I liked best below.
> One AI did add the caution :
> It is worth noting that alternative interpretations of quantum
> mechanics, such as the Copenhagen interpretation or the pilot-wave
> theory, have their own merits and drawbacks. The choice between
> interpretations often hinges on personal preference, philosophical
> considerations, and the specific problem being addressed.
> ----------
> I interpret that as saying that as yet quantum mechanics still has
> many theoretical difficulties.  :)
>
> BillK
> -------------------------------
>
> MWI Criticism Summary
>
> The Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) is a controversial interpretation
> of quantum mechanics that was proposed by physicist Hugh Everett III
> in 1957. It suggests that every possible outcome of a quantum
> measurement actually occurs in a separate universe, resulting in a
> branching or splitting of reality. While the MWI has gained some
> popularity among physicists, it also faces significant criticism and
> challenges from various perspectives.
>
> One of the main criticisms of the MWI is its lack of testability and
> falsifiability. Since the theory posits the existence of an infinite
> number of parallel universes, each with different outcomes, it becomes
> impossible to experimentally verify or disprove this claim. This lack
> of empirical evidence raises concerns about the scientific validity of
> the MWI as it deviates from the traditional scientific method.
>
> Another criticism revolves around the issue of probability. In the
> MWI, probabilities are assigned to different outcomes based on their
> relative frequency across all possible universes. However, this
> approach raises questions about how probabilities can be meaningfully
> defined when there are an infinite number of universes. Critics argue
> that without a clear framework for assigning probabilities, the MWI
> fails to provide a satisfactory explanation for observed phenomena.
>
> Furthermore, the MWI faces challenges in explaining macroscopic
> observations and classical behavior. While it may be able to account
> for quantum phenomena at the microscopic level, it struggles to
> explain why we observe a classical world with definite outcomes rather
> than a superposition of possibilities. Critics argue that the MWI
> fails to provide a convincing mechanism for the emergence of classical
> behavior from quantum principles.
>
> Additionally, some critics question the philosophical implications of
> the MWI. The theory suggests that every possible outcome exists in a
> separate universe, leading to an infinite number of parallel
> realities. This idea raises philosophical concerns about personal
> identity and consciousness. Critics argue that it is difficult to
> reconcile our subjective experience with the notion that there are
> countless versions of ourselves in different universes.
>
> Moreover, the MWI has been criticized for its complexity and lack of
> simplicity. Occam's razor, a principle in science that favors simpler
> explanations over more complex ones, is often invoked against the MWI.
> Critics argue that the theory introduces unnecessary complexity by
> postulating the existence of an infinite number of parallel universes,
> without providing a clear justification for such a hypothesis.
>
> In conclusion, while the Many Worlds Interpretation has gained
> attention and support from some physicists, it also faces significant
> criticism. The lack of testability and falsifiability, challenges in
> defining probabilities, difficulties in explaining macroscopic
> observations, philosophical implications, and complexity concerns are
> among the main criticisms raised against the MWI.
> -------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>