I was hoping to ask a really vague question so I displayed less of my total ignorance of QM.
Well wouldn’t it determine whether wave function collapse happens because of scale or because a human observed it or because you yourself observed it?
If neither having other humans outside the simulation nor having detectors changes the interference pattern, then the wave function collapse happens only if you yourself are effected by the information from the detectors.
If having other humans outside the simulation changes the interference pattern, then wave function collapse happens because any human is effected by the information from the detectors.
If having detectors changes the interference pattern even when no humans were effected by the information from the detectors, then wave function collapse happens at certain scales.
If having detectors changes the interference pattern even when no humans were effected by the information from the detectors, then wave function collapse happens at certain scales.
Having detectors present is already known to destroy the interference pattern, even if the detected information is silently and automatically erased right after (though I have trouble locating a relevant reference right now). A similar example is the experiment by Anton Zeilinger with hot bucky balls. The hotter they are, the less self-interference is observed, because the black-body radiation they emit gives away their position to some degree, even if this radiation is not specifically measured by anyone. Not sure what it says about your models.
If the detected information is silently and automatically destroyed, the interference pattern is recovered ..
Indeed, but it would take a lot more than a single polarizer to destroy all traces of thermal radiation from a fullerene molecule. Once those thermal photons are out, you cannot really destroy all traces of their interaction with the rest of the Universe. Well, maybe you can, somehow, but that was not attempted in the experiment. My original point was that entanglement with the environment (=possibility of detection) is enough to destroy the interference pattern. Hence my puzzlement by Incorrect’s statement that “wave function collapse happens at certain scales”.
even if the detected information is silently and automatically erased right after
Yes but it can still effect the humans through butterfly effects. If we put the humans in a digital simulation, nothing short of data corruption will effect them.
What would you expect to happen differently depending on whether the MWI is more than an interpretation?
I was hoping to ask a really vague question so I displayed less of my total ignorance of QM.
Well wouldn’t it determine whether wave function collapse happens because of scale or because a human observed it or because you yourself observed it?
If neither having other humans outside the simulation nor having detectors changes the interference pattern, then the wave function collapse happens only if you yourself are effected by the information from the detectors.
If having other humans outside the simulation changes the interference pattern, then wave function collapse happens because any human is effected by the information from the detectors.
If having detectors changes the interference pattern even when no humans were effected by the information from the detectors, then wave function collapse happens at certain scales.
Having detectors present is already known to destroy the interference pattern, even if the detected information is silently and automatically erased right after (though I have trouble locating a relevant reference right now). A similar example is the experiment by Anton Zeilinger with hot bucky balls. The hotter they are, the less self-interference is observed, because the black-body radiation they emit gives away their position to some degree, even if this radiation is not specifically measured by anyone. Not sure what it says about your models.
Doesn’t this contradict it though? If the detected information is silently and automatically destroyed, the interference pattern is recovered ..
Not sure where you see a contradiction.
Indeed, but it would take a lot more than a single polarizer to destroy all traces of thermal radiation from a fullerene molecule. Once those thermal photons are out, you cannot really destroy all traces of their interaction with the rest of the Universe. Well, maybe you can, somehow, but that was not attempted in the experiment. My original point was that entanglement with the environment (=possibility of detection) is enough to destroy the interference pattern. Hence my puzzlement by Incorrect’s statement that “wave function collapse happens at certain scales”.
Yes but it can still effect the humans through butterfly effects. If we put the humans in a digital simulation, nothing short of data corruption will effect them.