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

[Adrian Tymes]

On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 5:37 PM Jason Resch via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
> 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:
>> > 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.

No it isn't.

>> 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.

They are part of the definition of the Mermin device.  Whether or not
they are attempted analogues to quantum theory (which I grant,
emphasis on "attempted" analogues) is beside the point: the definition
of the Mermin device presupposes the outcome.

>>   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).

You misunderstand.  The definition that I read in that article is that
only a device that produces the specified outcome is the Mermin
device.  Therefore, any device with even a slightly different result -
as would be expected from any true device, with experimental noise -
is not that device.

This may appear to be semantics, but that's what sometimes happens
when one tries to explain quantum mechanics by fiat without actually
involving quantum mechanics, which appears to be what this Mermin
device is: the thoughtfully crafted alternative explanation does not
actually explain quantum mechanics.