[ExI] Google’s Willow Quantum Chip: Proof of the Multiverse?

[Adrian Tymes]

On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 12:29 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 8, 2025, 11:59 AM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 2:22 AM Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat
>> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>> > On 14/10/2025 04:31, Adrian Tymes wrote:
>> > > The AI explanation failed to address the question. Under MWI, the
>> > > worlds are separate after splitting, with no way to interact.  And
>> > > yet, this MWI explanation for this requires them to interact.  By what
>> > > means does the information get from one world to another after splitting?
>> >
>> > I don't claim to really understand this whole thing, but I was wondering
>> > about how a half-silvered mirror can create two photons without
>> > violating at least one conservation law, then realised that it doesn't,
>> > in the original world (I don't know about the other, presumably the
>> > photon existed in there all along, but not sure about that). After
>> > Adrian's comment above, I'm now wondering how the entanglement happens
>> > in the first place, if the two worlds can't interact?
>> >
>> > Not that I've ever understood what 'entanglement' actually means anyway.
>>
>> The superdeterministic explanation of entanglement is:
>>
>> * You have two particles.  (Or photons, or whatever.)
>> * You know that one is in one state (spin or some other paired
>> property), the other in the other, but you don't know which is which.
>> * These two start out in contact with one another (so there is no
>> problem "communicating" the state between them to start), but can be
>> separated by arbitrarily large distances while you still don't know
>> which one is in which state.
>> * The moment you figure out which one is in one state, you instantly
>> know the state of the other, no matter how far away it is.
>> * This doesn't violate light speed/causality/etc. because the result
>> of any action you take on this knowledge - and thus, the state of the
>> universe where the other particle's state is known - can only
>> propagate out at light speed from where and when you discovered the
>> first one's state.
>> * Not that that matters as much as it might seem, because the other
>> one was always in the state that it was in.  You just didn't know.
>
>
> But this explanation is insufficient, as the results you see will depend on how each of the two particles will later be measured.

They may depend on how they are interacted with - including the
specific means of measurement - to the same extent as if you knew the
original state.

But excluding those factors, they don't.  One particle is in one
state, and will remain in that state unless and until interacted with.
The other particle is likewise in the other state.

> And they might be separated by vast distances by the time they are measured, and hence will not be able (in theory) to coordinate the measurement results they reflect.

And don't have to.  See the above point on, "This doesn't violate...".

> Superdeterminism, accordingly, requires that that foreknowledge regarding how each particle will eventually be measured, must be factored into the creation of that particle pair at the time it is formed.

It does not.