Do you speak about calculating eigenfunctions of the Hamiltonian, then?
That would only tell you what values are possible for E, not what to set ψ(0) and ψ′(0) to, wouldn’t it? That said, I doubt finding those would be much harder.
As I understand it, it is a way how to look at physics, not giving time a special role.
Not exactly. It’s a different theory. If you believe time exists, the past and future wouldn’t interfere with each other. If you believe it doesn’t, there’s only one “time” and everything interferes. To my knowledge, it’s not different enough to actually test, like MWI vs. Copenhagen, but it’s different.
That would only tell you what values are possible for E, not what to set ψ(0) and ψ′(0) to,
They are already calculated in the process—they are a ψ1(0) + b ψ2(0), or with primes respectively.
Not exactly. It’s a different theory. If you believe time exists, the past and future wouldn’t interfere with each other. If you believe it doesn’t, there’s only one “time” and everything interferes.
I don’t understand what interference of past and future means.
They are already calculated in the process—they are a ψ1(0) + b ψ2(0), or with primes respectively.
Wouldn’t that just make it so it’s zero at that point, not that it doesn’t increase without limit as you get further?
I don’t understand what interference of past and future means.
According to normal MWI, there’s a universe in the present that’s just like this one was in the immediate past. Each of them have their own amplitude. If you wanted to calculate the probability of a universe that looks exactly like that, you’d take the probabilities of those universes individually and add them together. With timeless physics, there’s only one universe that looks like that. If you were to add two waveforms, perhaps one representing then and one now, you’d add the amplitudes and then square the magnitude of that.
I try to make a ψ1 + b ψ2 zero at boundaries, not at origin. If the boundaries lie in +- infinity, I have to approximate it by some finite number (when I was doing that last time, I used infinity = 8, it worked well with the respective problem). If this is what you have asked about.
According to normal MWI, there’s a universe in the present that’s just like this one was in the immediate past. Each of them have their own amplitude. If you wanted to calculate the probability of a universe that looks exactly like that, you’d take the probabilities of those universes individually and add them together.
I’m sorry, but I can’t parse the demonstrative pronouns. Please denote the universes by symbols.
That would only tell you what values are possible for E, not what to set ψ(0) and ψ′(0) to, wouldn’t it? That said, I doubt finding those would be much harder.
Not exactly. It’s a different theory. If you believe time exists, the past and future wouldn’t interfere with each other. If you believe it doesn’t, there’s only one “time” and everything interferes. To my knowledge, it’s not different enough to actually test, like MWI vs. Copenhagen, but it’s different.
They are already calculated in the process—they are a ψ1(0) + b ψ2(0), or with primes respectively.
I don’t understand what interference of past and future means.
Wouldn’t that just make it so it’s zero at that point, not that it doesn’t increase without limit as you get further?
According to normal MWI, there’s a universe in the present that’s just like this one was in the immediate past. Each of them have their own amplitude. If you wanted to calculate the probability of a universe that looks exactly like that, you’d take the probabilities of those universes individually and add them together. With timeless physics, there’s only one universe that looks like that. If you were to add two waveforms, perhaps one representing then and one now, you’d add the amplitudes and then square the magnitude of that.
I try to make a ψ1 + b ψ2 zero at boundaries, not at origin. If the boundaries lie in +- infinity, I have to approximate it by some finite number (when I was doing that last time, I used infinity = 8, it worked well with the respective problem). If this is what you have asked about.
I’m sorry, but I can’t parse the demonstrative pronouns. Please denote the universes by symbols.