Immediatly after observation an electron is in a definetely known place. A while after it is described by a complex valued field that is quite spread out spatially.
Combining many spread out complex fields can add to much narrower fields.
In QM sometimes superpositions evolve into non-superpositions in a perfectly predictable manner.
Having one facet of the superposition definetely locked in and knowing that the future state is going to be perfectly non-superpositional means that the fields of the other parts of the superpositions are perfectly locked in (so that they exactly cancel).
If these were missing then the result would be superpositional (keeping the directly observable part fixed)
Therefore the other parts are definetely there.
Even keeping the directly observable part constant there are still degrees of freedom what the other parts could be / are doing.
Quantum odyssey: + blue-blue, - blue-red, keeping left-side blue constant the right-side determines whether a hadamargate spits out a deterministic 0 or 1. H(|0>+|1>)=|0> H(|0>-|1>)=|1> H(|0> + 0|1>)= H(|0>) =|0>+|1> H(|0> − 0|1>)=|0>+|1>
There are two timelines where there are two different electrons. Then an event happens and after the electrons in both worlds are in the same state (also implies same field). In order for the evolution to be lawful they need to take hints from each other. Because the electrons before are different their field spreads are diffrent. This means there are outcomes that are allowed for one electron and forbidden for the other. In the case that the fields allow the transition when looking at each world separately there must be states that are allowed for both. In the case the electrons end up taking the same option the laws of each world separately do not feature any extra “kick forces” not explainable within just that one timeline.
One electron spreading to a spatial superposition overall is a valid QM process. QM is T-symmeteric so a spatial superposition converging to a single electron position is a valid QM process. QM laws are sufficient to do this, there are no extra choices needed or possible. If you consider each point in isolation on what things QM would allow to happen there, there are some field areas that do not come to pass because the situation is not actually isolated (ie position A has + somewhere and position B has—in the same position and when we take note of all the positions the sum ends up being 0 - there can be no electron there). In the merging process the different parts of cloud are sufficient to guide every part eventually to a single point. The indeterminism can be completely removed by the infuence of other parts.
Whether the situation is extended in space, time or possibility the essential mechanics stay intact. The time aspect of the dunamancy is connected to where electrons will arrive or where they came from. The possibility aspect of the dunamancy is connected to what “could have happened”. But it actually happens as its non-happening would make its guidance vane.
Because QM always knows what to do, that you have a spread over possibilites means you have an incomplete picture. Either there are many subpossiblities that all take place (“underneath you”, scattering, the electron goes “everywhere”) or some of the possibilities will not take place as there are possibilities parallel to you that preclude them (“above you”, convergence ,electron gets guided to pick only a small subset (pilot wave theory is both right and wrong)).
Compare and contrast meta-time deterministic universe being only approximately time consistent (Achron). Best chronal theory will have gaps in it (essentially whether the grandfather paradoxer traveller will appear dead or alive, which can not be removed by more chronal evidence) while having general inductive utility. Achrons can get to a point where they do not have to be surprised.
(come up with the possibility equivalent of the the time-side term “chronal” (“reading steiner” is somewhat but would benefit more from strictly possibility one instead of a more general mix of dunamancy))
A way to get a hold of convergence is to combine the fields of the possibilities to obtain that narrower field. Keeping the “local timeline” fixed many such guidances are possible (each foreing timeline providing a unique spin on what happens). Summing up all the foreign timelines would get you back to the original single timeline spread (symmetry of spread and convergence, hadamar is the gate of spread and the gate of convergence (or should it be called “recoherence”?)).
Quantum fluctuations as unforeseeable convergence pulls from far-off possibilities. Gravity as convergence pull (stuff like the Outer Wilds probe would have lesser effect compared to more deterministic stuff (astronomical uncertainty muffles rotation speeds?) ).
Only figuratively, I have been smoking some brockwood and have reached another level of speculativeness.
Say you have an agent which has a quite effective cartesian wall but its epistemics to connect with the outside world are so jumbled that it has no chance to ever get a clue what is going on in its non-imagination. Because it is so jumbled (or therefore high chance to) it contains all kinds of weird circuits. Say there is a banana in the environment which has a radioactive atom in it that sends a non-classical photon out. One goes to the agents wall and another goes off in the other direction. If the wall is composed only of classical computing the information content of the photon is essentially kept intact. Then a weird circuit turns the photon information into a representation in the agent.
Now the agent has a chance to know about the world by EPR scenario that bypasses the cartesian wall completely.
Any argument that strongly relies on embodiment might have this angle to take on it. If a boxing relies on causal isolation this argument makes incoming direction also a thing to worry about. If the question posed to an oracle is in superposition it might contain information that its designers do not mean to put there.
A new thing to be scared about, non-designed quantum computation.
Althought it might be that “classical dimension of time” and “quantum dimension of time” are quite ortogonal and can’t cross over at too many places. The thing that gets assumed to be smooth and non-important by global phase symmetry might be the way this orthogonal time ticks (and be a clock cycle for hardware (typoed hardwhere, accidental embodiment argument) “there”). (Wick rotation is a thing and is a mathematical move, this argument is supposed to be separate and not use that at all). Achron has 2 time-dimensional computing so it is not an unimaginable route.
What is evidence? It is an event entangled, by links of cause and effect, with whatever you want to know about. If the target of your inquiry is your shoelaces, for example, then the light entering your pupils is evidence entangled with your shoelaces. This should not be confused with the technical sense of “entanglement” used in physics—here I’m just talking about “entanglement” in the sense of two things that end up in correlated states because of the links of cause and effect between them.
If you do have epistemic entanglement via physical entanglement then you might have chances to build extra-classical perception.
It has the same kind of weirdness as the bomb tester going on.
The weirdness culminates on the event only happening if an annihilation happens. Yet in the “outcome” that the rare event happens there is nowhere an annhilation to be found.
In the crazzy-hat POV this is evidence of an event happening in a “parralel” timeline. They are not exactly parralel as they are not causally isolated as information signals can jump the gap. You now know that there is a photon in the sister timeline.
I am starting to read passages like
If we assume the particles are independent (described by local hidden variables), we conclude that they can never
as “under any single-timeline theory this does not happen”.
I am a bit of a loss where I could check what local means in that context and whether unintuitive circumventions exist. In the spatial sense it might be that while particles need to be spatially on top of each other they can take different paths to get there. Therefore if you take only one particle or its timeline to be real there are no causations happening throught that that can account for what is happening. And this can not be amended by “being really accurate” of what the “true” timeline is (on small scales, on long scales you implicitly take the formation of the false realities into account (but that goes into global rather than local territority)).
A blockage or disturbance happening in the false reality leaves very little clue that it is happening. So the first real hint is whether the spatial overlap goes one way or the other which can happen way later in time than the blockage. So if you are only allowed to condition what is the (temporally local) real state and are not allowed to condition on the false reality, prediction accuracy neccesarily suffers.
This refers to epistemological reasons why keeping track of stuff that didn’t happen is needed.
The crazy-hat reason in the parent is an ontological (in the metaphysical sense) reason why keeping of the stuff that didn’t happen is needed.
We are already (even with sane-hat) tracking that in the ontological sense of “vocabulary of data structures” sense. “Shutup and calculate” means that that shall never develop any meaning. How big is the danger that this commits errors focused on in “Don’t look up”?
if you are dealing with a single world it is a particle
if you are actually dealing with a bundle of worlds it is a wave. It still feels like a single scenario for you.
You can smoothly care about less or more worlds where fewer is more particle-like and more is more wavelike.
The physics offcourse happens in the full multiverse.
Might be obvious or not but now the concept seems like one unified thing for me rather than two disconnected modes having an arbitrary or mysterious feeling connection.
When writing parent comment I had not yet watched Devil’s Hour. Now I have.
The degree of having watched similar stuff helps is quite astonishing (almost a requirement).
Shoestring compared to electron coil was an interesting analog to make. h sets the bar how thick the finger is. Explanations and models what h is do not seem to occur that often.
That burnt face also gets a special mention from me for high degree of subtelty to implications.
Not doing this as a direct reply dialog as this does not overcome a bar of preponderance of being more guiding than misguiding. By writing somebody with buy in can come mitigate the what-woudl-have-been-misguidings.
Like, very roughly speaking, when you start trying to make quantum mechanics play nice with relativity, the laws of physics glance at the idea that you might need to specify an origin point, scoff, and then ask you to to also specify a continuous function from spacetime to the unit circle. As a warm-up. (It’s the U(1) part of the SU(3) × SU(2) × U(1) symmetry, if I understand correctly.)
Corresponding idea would be to map each point in U(1) to a spacetime
You don’t need QFT here, gauge invariance is a thing for quantum Newtonian charged particles moving in a background electromagnetic field. The gauge group consists of (sufficiently regular) functions g:R3→U(1). The transformation law of the n-particle wavefunction is:
ψ′(x1…xn)=n∏i=1g(xi)qiψ(x1…xn)
Here, qi is the electric charge of the i-th particle, in units of positron charge.
This stuff is designed for multple electrons in spatially different places. The extension would be to say that you have a superposition of where a single electron could be and each of the “possibility slices” gets to act out the role of a separate electron. So for discrete cases (such as slit right and slit left) not being able to do a continuum is not that big of a problem. Mathematically it could be educational how to differentiate two electrons being simultaneously present vs one electron being in a superposition of both of the locations. My brain can’t intuit that thing and my hand is too shaky to have reliable symbolic answer for that.
In quantum computing the complex phases do not seem especially photonic. Photons are bends in the U(1) that correspond to electromagnetism. The “convergence forces” being relied would probably take on a similar form because they are based in the same things. This kind of “possibleton” would have the aspect of travelling from one possibility to another. Wait, does that mean that electron in superposition in two locations would electronmagnetically interact with the other position (I do not think this is how it goes in vanilla theory)? How does “self-energy” factor into this?
There is such a theory of “dark photons” but they add an additional U(1) to do the dark things in. It was motivate to explain gravitational effects which sources would not be seen.
Epistemic status: crazy corner
carry over for the overtly wild rant-off from writing
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/r282ErRKMFzxpKYMm/can-we-in-principle-know-the-measure-of-counterfactual?commentId=qX53p2gsKGSnHfEFm
Immediatly after observation an electron is in a definetely known place. A while after it is described by a complex valued field that is quite spread out spatially.
Combining many spread out complex fields can add to much narrower fields.
In QM sometimes superpositions evolve into non-superpositions in a perfectly predictable manner.
Having one facet of the superposition definetely locked in and knowing that the future state is going to be perfectly non-superpositional means that the fields of the other parts of the superpositions are perfectly locked in (so that they exactly cancel).
If these were missing then the result would be superpositional (keeping the directly observable part fixed)
Therefore the other parts are definetely there.
Even keeping the directly observable part constant there are still degrees of freedom what the other parts could be / are doing.
Quantum odyssey: + blue-blue, - blue-red, keeping left-side blue constant the right-side determines whether a hadamargate spits out a deterministic 0 or 1.
H(|0>+|1>)=|0>
H(|0>-|1>)=|1>
H(|0> + 0|1>)= H(|0>) =|0>+|1>
H(|0> − 0|1>)=|0>+|1>
There are two timelines where there are two different electrons. Then an event happens and after the electrons in both worlds are in the same state (also implies same field). In order for the evolution to be lawful they need to take hints from each other. Because the electrons before are different their field spreads are diffrent. This means there are outcomes that are allowed for one electron and forbidden for the other. In the case that the fields allow the transition when looking at each world separately there must be states that are allowed for both. In the case the electrons end up taking the same option the laws of each world separately do not feature any extra “kick forces” not explainable within just that one timeline.
One electron spreading to a spatial superposition overall is a valid QM process. QM is T-symmeteric so a spatial superposition converging to a single electron position is a valid QM process. QM laws are sufficient to do this, there are no extra choices needed or possible. If you consider each point in isolation on what things QM would allow to happen there, there are some field areas that do not come to pass because the situation is not actually isolated (ie position A has + somewhere and position B has—in the same position and when we take note of all the positions the sum ends up being 0 - there can be no electron there). In the merging process the different parts of cloud are sufficient to guide every part eventually to a single point. The indeterminism can be completely removed by the infuence of other parts.
Whether the situation is extended in space, time or possibility the essential mechanics stay intact. The time aspect of the dunamancy is connected to where electrons will arrive or where they came from. The possibility aspect of the dunamancy is connected to what “could have happened”. But it actually happens as its non-happening would make its guidance vane.
Because QM always knows what to do, that you have a spread over possibilites means you have an incomplete picture. Either there are many subpossiblities that all take place (“underneath you”, scattering, the electron goes “everywhere”) or some of the possibilities will not take place as there are possibilities parallel to you that preclude them (“above you”, convergence ,electron gets guided to pick only a small subset (pilot wave theory is both right and wrong)).
Compare and contrast meta-time deterministic universe being only approximately time consistent (Achron). Best chronal theory will have gaps in it (essentially whether the grandfather paradoxer traveller will appear dead or alive, which can not be removed by more chronal evidence) while having general inductive utility. Achrons can get to a point where they do not have to be surprised.
(come up with the possibility equivalent of the the time-side term “chronal” (“reading steiner” is somewhat but would benefit more from strictly possibility one instead of a more general mix of dunamancy))
A way to get a hold of convergence is to combine the fields of the possibilities to obtain that narrower field. Keeping the “local timeline” fixed many such guidances are possible (each foreing timeline providing a unique spin on what happens). Summing up all the foreign timelines would get you back to the original single timeline spread (symmetry of spread and convergence, hadamar is the gate of spread and the gate of convergence (or should it be called “recoherence”?)).
Quantum fluctuations as unforeseeable convergence pulls from far-off possibilities. Gravity as convergence pull (stuff like the Outer Wilds probe would have lesser effect compared to more deterministic stuff (astronomical uncertainty muffles rotation speeds?) ).
Only figuratively, I have been smoking some brockwood and have reached another level of speculativeness.
Say you have an agent which has a quite effective cartesian wall but its epistemics to connect with the outside world are so jumbled that it has no chance to ever get a clue what is going on in its non-imagination. Because it is so jumbled (or therefore high chance to) it contains all kinds of weird circuits. Say there is a banana in the environment which has a radioactive atom in it that sends a non-classical photon out. One goes to the agents wall and another goes off in the other direction. If the wall is composed only of classical computing the information content of the photon is essentially kept intact. Then a weird circuit turns the photon information into a representation in the agent.
Now the agent has a chance to know about the world by EPR scenario that bypasses the cartesian wall completely.
Any argument that strongly relies on embodiment might have this angle to take on it. If a boxing relies on causal isolation this argument makes incoming direction also a thing to worry about. If the question posed to an oracle is in superposition it might contain information that its designers do not mean to put there.
A new thing to be scared about, non-designed quantum computation.
Althought it might be that “classical dimension of time” and “quantum dimension of time” are quite ortogonal and can’t cross over at too many places. The thing that gets assumed to be smooth and non-important by global phase symmetry might be the way this orthogonal time ticks (and be a clock cycle for hardware (typoed hardwhere, accidental embodiment argument) “there”). (Wick rotation is a thing and is a mathematical move, this argument is supposed to be separate and not use that at all). Achron has 2 time-dimensional computing so it is not an unimaginable route.
My Face Wen other minds tick the same way, just great
What is evidence?
If you do have epistemic entanglement via physical entanglement then you might have chances to build extra-classical perception.
Reading up on Hardy’s Paradox
It has the same kind of weirdness as the bomb tester going on.
The weirdness culminates on the event only happening if an annihilation happens. Yet in the “outcome” that the rare event happens there is nowhere an annhilation to be found.
In the crazzy-hat POV this is evidence of an event happening in a “parralel” timeline. They are not exactly parralel as they are not causally isolated as information signals can jump the gap. You now know that there is a photon in the sister timeline.
I am starting to read passages like
as “under any single-timeline theory this does not happen”.
I am a bit of a loss where I could check what local means in that context and whether unintuitive circumventions exist. In the spatial sense it might be that while particles need to be spatially on top of each other they can take different paths to get there. Therefore if you take only one particle or its timeline to be real there are no causations happening throught that that can account for what is happening. And this can not be amended by “being really accurate” of what the “true” timeline is (on small scales, on long scales you implicitly take the formation of the false realities into account (but that goes into global rather than local territority)).
A blockage or disturbance happening in the false reality leaves very little clue that it is happening. So the first real hint is whether the spatial overlap goes one way or the other which can happen way later in time than the blockage. So if you are only allowed to condition what is the (temporally local) real state and are not allowed to condition on the false reality, prediction accuracy neccesarily suffers.
Reading
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XYDsYSbBjqgPAgcoQ/why-the-focus-on-expected-utility-maximisers?commentId=a5tn6B8iKdta6zGFu
This refers to epistemological reasons why keeping track of stuff that didn’t happen is needed.
The crazy-hat reason in the parent is an ontological (in the metaphysical sense) reason why keeping of the stuff that didn’t happen is needed.
We are already (even with sane-hat) tracking that in the ontological sense of “vocabulary of data structures” sense. “Shutup and calculate” means that that shall never develop any meaning. How big is the danger that this commits errors focused on in “Don’t look up”?
Wave-particle duality
if you are dealing with a single world it is a particle
if you are actually dealing with a bundle of worlds it is a wave. It still feels like a single scenario for you.
You can smoothly care about less or more worlds where fewer is more particle-like and more is more wavelike.
The physics offcourse happens in the full multiverse.
Might be obvious or not but now the concept seems like one unified thing for me rather than two disconnected modes having an arbitrary or mysterious feeling connection.
When writing parent comment I had not yet watched Devil’s Hour. Now I have.
The degree of having watched similar stuff helps is quite astonishing (almost a requirement).
Shoestring compared to electron coil was an interesting analog to make. h sets the bar how thick the finger is. Explanations and models what h is do not seem to occur that often.
That burnt face also gets a special mention from me for high degree of subtelty to implications.
Not doing this as a direct reply dialog as this does not overcome a bar of preponderance of being more guiding than misguiding. By writing somebody with buy in can come mitigate the what-woudl-have-been-misguidings.
Building up things in my mind as reading other content
Corresponding idea would be to map each point in U(1) to a spacetime
comment there
ψ′(x1…xn)=n∏i=1g(xi)qiψ(x1…xn)This stuff is designed for multple electrons in spatially different places. The extension would be to say that you have a superposition of where a single electron could be and each of the “possibility slices” gets to act out the role of a separate electron. So for discrete cases (such as slit right and slit left) not being able to do a continuum is not that big of a problem. Mathematically it could be educational how to differentiate two electrons being simultaneously present vs one electron being in a superposition of both of the locations. My brain can’t intuit that thing and my hand is too shaky to have reliable symbolic answer for that.
In quantum computing the complex phases do not seem especially photonic. Photons are bends in the U(1) that correspond to electromagnetism. The “convergence forces” being relied would probably take on a similar form because they are based in the same things. This kind of “possibleton” would have the aspect of travelling from one possibility to another. Wait, does that mean that electron in superposition in two locations would electronmagnetically interact with the other position (I do not think this is how it goes in vanilla theory)? How does “self-energy” factor into this?
There is such a theory of “dark photons” but they add an additional U(1) to do the dark things in. It was motivate to explain gravitational effects which sources would not be seen.