Smedly: the Born rule… the whole probability of what you seem to experience observing is proportional to the squared magnitude thing. ie, if you had a two state system, say a qbit, in a superposition of, say, 2⁄3|0> + sqrt(5)i/3*|1>, then if you take a measurement of a bunch of qbits that are independantly in that state, then you’d expect about 4⁄9 of them to be 0, and 5⁄9 of them to be 1.
Given that QM is linear, you can see why the existance of such a rule may be a bit confusing. And given the many worlds perspective, the question of “probability of… what, exactly?” is a question too. Seems hard to even phrase the rule without invoking consciousness. Thus, we, or at least I (did everyone else solve it and simply keep me out of the loop? :)) am confused on this matter.
Jeeves: whaaaa?
Smedly: the Born rule… the whole probability of what you seem to experience observing is proportional to the squared magnitude thing. ie, if you had a two state system, say a qbit, in a superposition of, say, 2⁄3|0> + sqrt(5)i/3*|1>, then if you take a measurement of a bunch of qbits that are independantly in that state, then you’d expect about 4⁄9 of them to be 0, and 5⁄9 of them to be 1.
Given that QM is linear, you can see why the existance of such a rule may be a bit confusing. And given the many worlds perspective, the question of “probability of… what, exactly?” is a question too. Seems hard to even phrase the rule without invoking consciousness. Thus, we, or at least I (did everyone else solve it and simply keep me out of the loop? :)) am confused on this matter.