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

[Jason Resch]

On Sat, Nov 8, 2025, 5:19 PM Adrian Tymes via extropy-chat <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 2:44 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat
> <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> > I admit I don't understand how the three detector system is arranged.
>
> The problem is in the arrangement.  On the one hand, the description
> declares that they are independent...and then asserts, a priori,
> outcomes that suggest they are dependent.
>

It's quantum theory, and the experimental confirmation of the predictions
of that theory, that suggests they're dependent (contrary to our usual
expectations).

In fact, they can't be independent (without giving up locality,
counterfactual definiteness, or measurement independence).


> > I'm not sure I understand this. Are you say there is room for free will
> and randomness in your theory?
>
> Yes.
>
> > If there is any degree of randomness or free will permitted, then if one
> uses it in deciding how to pick which of the three positions on the Mermin
> device
>
> ...it would no longer be the Merman device.


It's still the Mermin device. What has changed, if you admit true
randomness or free will, is a departure from superdeterminism's insistence
on giving up measurement independence.

For if there is free will, or true randomness, then you can use it to setup
the two experiment to be truly independent of each other. Hence this would
violate the core assumption of superdeterminism: that you can't setup
experiments to be independent of one another.

And then you are back to the situation of trying to account for the
violation of Bell's inequality.

Having ruled out superdeterminism (by assuming true randomness or free
will) then your only remaining options are FTL influences or many worlds.


Again: the Merman device
> asserts a certain set of outcomes as part of its description.


These assertions were not made in a vacuum;  they come straight out of
quantum theory.

Would Feynman have told Mermin that his paper was one of the most beautiful
in all of physics, if it were hogwash based on unsupported assertions and
suppositions?

  True
> randomness would allow, e.g. 1/2 or 1/5 or other such values to
> sometimes be measured, which is explicitly ruled out.
>

But note they are relies out by experiment (and quantum theory).

Jason
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20251108/0f520fe7/attachment.htm>