The Many-Worlds theory of the nature of reality as demonstrated by the quantum mechanical aspects of superpositioning of the universe and wavefunction collapse of alternative realities
Created | Updated Feb 10, 2003
Light has long been known to have qualities of both wave and particle. That is to say, it both moves as a particle but creates patterns in waves. In the latter twentieth century we have discovered that light is actually made up of what we have dubbed "quanta" which are tiny packets of energy. These quanta are like nothing else we've ever observed, as the quanta and other particles on this level do not follow the known laws of physics. This discovery has led also to the development of a field of science known as Quantum Physics. Do any of you remember that show "Quantum Leap"? If so, stop. That show butchers reality for entertainment value. Any similarities between that show and what I am telling you are coincidence. DO NOT try to use ideas from that show, as real scientists will laugh at you and mock your parents for raising you. Quantum physics has to do with the nature of reality on a sub-sub-sub atomic level. By observing things on the quantum level, we get closer to understanding the ultimate nature of reality. By using what we have learned we have developed the "many-worlds" theory. Not all scientists do not believe in this theory, this is just one of the myraid of possibilities. I will explain the theory here as well as putting forward proof. By the end of this paper I intend to have convinced you that the "many-worlds" theory is correct.
To begin, I will explain how light has aspects of both wave and particle. This understanding is integral to understanding the rest. This has long been explained by using the "two-slit" experiment, first theorized by de Broglie and later carried out by C.J. Davisson and L.H. Germer. First consider the setup of the experiment. You have three main parts, Object A, B, and C. Object A is the source of particles. It is like a small raygun pointed at Objects B and C. In this case we will be using electrons from Object A. Object B is a screen with two slits, either of which or both can be closed or opened. The slits are about two inches from the exact center of the screen, one to the right and one to the left. The screen is set up pointed towards Obj.A so the electrons could go through the slits. Object C is an array of Geiger counters distributed along another screen, located behind Obj.B so that when the electrons pass through the slits, they strike Obj.C. Consider when particles are released from Object A when slit 1 is opened and slit 2 is closed. The distribution of particles follows a probability pattern of P1. P1 looks like an arc centered over the left side of Obj.C. What this means is that the most probable place for particles to land is in the center of P1 where probability is highest. Now consider the same experiment when slit 1 is closed and slit 2 is open. The results are identical, with the probability matrix shifted down a few inches to P2 so that the probability of where particles will hit is the greatest at the center of P2. Now consider the same experiment when both slits are open. From logical thinking you would say the probability matrices would combine and look something like P3, which would be a larger arc, covering the entire screen rather than just the left or right side.. However, this is not the case. Instead you get a probability function of a wave, with alternating peaks and troughs, called P12. So by this experiment we see that particles (electrons here) fall in the probability pattern of a wave. But what is affecting them? What causes this to happen?
Perhaps you have not caught on to the significance of this experiment. For the particles to create a wave function, each particle would have had to pass through BOTH slits, thereby affecting itself and creating an interference pattern. Light is a wave phenomenon, and as such had you had shined a wave of light at the slits instead of electrons it would create a wave function because it does pass through both slits. But surely, a particle that gets to the Geiger counters HAD to pass through one slit or another and not both? Well we can check this. We shine a lights on the slits from the side and from the reflected signal are able to detect which slit the particle passes through. We do this and find that each particle only passes through one slit, as we expected. But lo and behold! In this case, instead of getting the probability of a wave function, we get the previously theorized function P3 which is what is expected when particles go through only one slit. It seems that the very act of observing has changed the results! But maybe the light shining on the particles we used to detect them somehow altered their course and changed the results? Well then we repeat the experiment, reducing the intensity of the detecting light to minimize this. But when we do this sometimes the electron is not "seen" at all, and at the end of the experiment we again get the wave function P12. In short, if you see where the electron goes, you get the expected P3, but if you do not you get the wave function of P12.
The reason for this is the collapse of the wavefunction and the superposition of states. Big words, but easy enough to explain. For this we will use Schrodinger's Cat in a Box experiment. A cat is put in a sealed box also containing a smaller box. This smaller box contains cyanide gas, which is instantly fatal. Connected to the smaller box is a device containing a small bit of radioactive matter, which is constantly shooting off particles at random times and directions. The device is set to release the gas if a certain pattern of particles is detected. So until that pattern of particles are released, the cat is safe. But the thing is that we, the observers, are outside the box with no way of knowing what has happened. Is the cat dead yet, or still alive? The only way to tell is to open up the box. Until someone gets a crowbar to open the box and check, the cat is in a superposition of states where it is both dead and alive. Not in an in-between state like night of the living dead, but actually both. When the box is opened and the cat is observed, a collapse of the wavefunction occurs and the cat is found to be either alive or dead.
This experiment proves nothing new, it is merely used to demonstrate what we know to be, namely that if more than one decision is possible, and noone is looking, both happen. And each state continues to exist until it is observed, at which time they collapse together randomly, and one of them is observed to be the real one. BUT as in the case of the cat in the box, if you are part of the situation yourself, your own observing doesn't count and both still happen to you until you are observed by someone else. The cat was not able to observe its own state and collapse the wavefunction. To paraphrase the situation, I just ripped the keyboard from my computer and beat myself to death with it. I also went to get a coffee. I also decided to become a rural cowboy and never come near civilization again. But then my grandma came in here to tell me to turn down the damn music, at which point the wavefunction collapsed and I was observed to be typing this little sentence here, and now that is reality. Of course, probabilities come into it to. There was not an equal probibility that i was here writing this and that i was riding horses and wearing leather chaps, so the probability that is most likely is the one that will usually happen.
What I have just described is a summing up of the Copenhagen theory, whereas there is only one true universe, but at times it is fissioned into two when a decision has to be made and then fused into one again when the decision has been observed. The Many-Worlds theory elaborates on that with a greater attention to detail and a slightly different line of thought. Let's go back to Schrodinger's experiment for a moment. Lets assume Schrodinger (referred to as Mr.S from now on because I'm tired of typing his name) has a friend with him while he performs the experiment. Now if Mr.S's friend looks in the box and tells noone what he saw, he ALSO exists in a superposition of states, one where he saw the cat dead and one where he saw the cat alive. This continues until Mr.S asks him what happened, at such time Mr.S also exists in a superposition of states, one where he heard one explanation, and a second where he heard the other. Mr.S stays in a superposition of states until another observer checks the outcome of the experiment with him, and so on. So what made the Universe real, and not a superposition of states? For the universe to exist as a single line and not as a superposition of states, an observer from outside the set (I.E. an observer OUTSIDE the universe) has to exist. Barring that, the Universe DOES exist in a superposition of states, all of which are equally real, with no collapse of the wavefunction possible. One could theorize a "God" who lives (exists?) outside the universe. This leads to an interesting theological discussion. In the bible it states that God created all, made everything come into existence. He also pledged a non-interference pact with the devil, whereas neither of them would enter the universe and affect the lives of mortals (the devil, of course, broke the pact, but that's a different story). So his continued creation of the universe and existence is based merely on his ability to "see and know all". By observing, he causes the wavefront functions to collapse, thereby eliminating all extraneous universes. While the wavefront collapse is random, mabey his power lies in the ability to select which reality he observes causing all versions of reality to collapse except that one.
Assuming, though, that there is no God, or that there is a God, but he doesn't count as an observer and therefore doesn't cause collapse, the universe exists in a superposition of states between which no communication is possible. Now you might ask why we don't notice this happening. After all, even as dense as most people are, they would notice the entire universe splitting into probability matrices, wouldn't they? Well according to aspects of the Everett theory the laws of quantum mechanics do not allow an observer within the set to observe the splitting aspect of the set itself. In a footnote in his paper from July 1957, Everett defended his ideas by pointing out that when Copernicus first suggested the Earth revolves around the sun, this view was criticized on the grounds that if it were, that people would feel the earth moving. This was proved false later on by Newton's mathematics. Similarly, we cannot feel the universes splitting which is proved with quantum mathematics.
"You said that communication between universes is impossible" points out my father "so how can you prove that the many-worlds theory is the correct one?". The ultimate answer, after all the mathematics and scientific jargon are removed is that we cant. It is impossible after looking at all the evidence to prove that ANY theory is correct, the universe seems to be set up this way. At this point science leaves off and faith begins. I have faith that this interpretation is the correct one. Somewhere out there, in the multitudes of realities and what ifs, there is a universe in which a truly feasable government has been devised. There is a universe in which really cool things like bionic implants have been created and are easily available. There is a universe where people as a whole are happy enough that noone needs to take pot or heroin or crack, and where noone ever gets drunk. I quest to get the universe I occupy as close to that one as possible. As a great man once noted, God does not play dice with the universe. He would not leave things to chance. So he plays out EVERY possibility. Plus, this explanation makes for GREAT science fiction.
Bibliography
Treiman, Sam. The odd quantum. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press 1999
Gribbin, John. Schrodinger's Kittens and the search for reality. Boston : Little, Brown and Company 1995
Baggot, Jim. The Meaning of quantum theory . Oxford : Oxford University Press 1992
Vigier, J.P. Quantum Implications. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul 1987
To begin, I will explain how light has aspects of both wave and particle. This understanding is integral to understanding the rest. This has long been explained by using the "two-slit" experiment, first theorized by de Broglie and later carried out by C.J. Davisson and L.H. Germer. First consider the setup of the experiment. You have three main parts, Object A, B, and C. Object A is the source of particles. It is like a small raygun pointed at Objects B and C. In this case we will be using electrons from Object A. Object B is a screen with two slits, either of which or both can be closed or opened. The slits are about two inches from the exact center of the screen, one to the right and one to the left. The screen is set up pointed towards Obj.A so the electrons could go through the slits. Object C is an array of Geiger counters distributed along another screen, located behind Obj.B so that when the electrons pass through the slits, they strike Obj.C. Consider when particles are released from Object A when slit 1 is opened and slit 2 is closed. The distribution of particles follows a probability pattern of P1. P1 looks like an arc centered over the left side of Obj.C. What this means is that the most probable place for particles to land is in the center of P1 where probability is highest. Now consider the same experiment when slit 1 is closed and slit 2 is open. The results are identical, with the probability matrix shifted down a few inches to P2 so that the probability of where particles will hit is the greatest at the center of P2. Now consider the same experiment when both slits are open. From logical thinking you would say the probability matrices would combine and look something like P3, which would be a larger arc, covering the entire screen rather than just the left or right side.. However, this is not the case. Instead you get a probability function of a wave, with alternating peaks and troughs, called P12. So by this experiment we see that particles (electrons here) fall in the probability pattern of a wave. But what is affecting them? What causes this to happen?
Perhaps you have not caught on to the significance of this experiment. For the particles to create a wave function, each particle would have had to pass through BOTH slits, thereby affecting itself and creating an interference pattern. Light is a wave phenomenon, and as such had you had shined a wave of light at the slits instead of electrons it would create a wave function because it does pass through both slits. But surely, a particle that gets to the Geiger counters HAD to pass through one slit or another and not both? Well we can check this. We shine a lights on the slits from the side and from the reflected signal are able to detect which slit the particle passes through. We do this and find that each particle only passes through one slit, as we expected. But lo and behold! In this case, instead of getting the probability of a wave function, we get the previously theorized function P3 which is what is expected when particles go through only one slit. It seems that the very act of observing has changed the results! But maybe the light shining on the particles we used to detect them somehow altered their course and changed the results? Well then we repeat the experiment, reducing the intensity of the detecting light to minimize this. But when we do this sometimes the electron is not "seen" at all, and at the end of the experiment we again get the wave function P12. In short, if you see where the electron goes, you get the expected P3, but if you do not you get the wave function of P12.
The reason for this is the collapse of the wavefunction and the superposition of states. Big words, but easy enough to explain. For this we will use Schrodinger's Cat in a Box experiment. A cat is put in a sealed box also containing a smaller box. This smaller box contains cyanide gas, which is instantly fatal. Connected to the smaller box is a device containing a small bit of radioactive matter, which is constantly shooting off particles at random times and directions. The device is set to release the gas if a certain pattern of particles is detected. So until that pattern of particles are released, the cat is safe. But the thing is that we, the observers, are outside the box with no way of knowing what has happened. Is the cat dead yet, or still alive? The only way to tell is to open up the box. Until someone gets a crowbar to open the box and check, the cat is in a superposition of states where it is both dead and alive. Not in an in-between state like night of the living dead, but actually both. When the box is opened and the cat is observed, a collapse of the wavefunction occurs and the cat is found to be either alive or dead.
This experiment proves nothing new, it is merely used to demonstrate what we know to be, namely that if more than one decision is possible, and noone is looking, both happen. And each state continues to exist until it is observed, at which time they collapse together randomly, and one of them is observed to be the real one. BUT as in the case of the cat in the box, if you are part of the situation yourself, your own observing doesn't count and both still happen to you until you are observed by someone else. The cat was not able to observe its own state and collapse the wavefunction. To paraphrase the situation, I just ripped the keyboard from my computer and beat myself to death with it. I also went to get a coffee. I also decided to become a rural cowboy and never come near civilization again. But then my grandma came in here to tell me to turn down the damn music, at which point the wavefunction collapsed and I was observed to be typing this little sentence here, and now that is reality. Of course, probabilities come into it to. There was not an equal probibility that i was here writing this and that i was riding horses and wearing leather chaps, so the probability that is most likely is the one that will usually happen.
What I have just described is a summing up of the Copenhagen theory, whereas there is only one true universe, but at times it is fissioned into two when a decision has to be made and then fused into one again when the decision has been observed. The Many-Worlds theory elaborates on that with a greater attention to detail and a slightly different line of thought. Let's go back to Schrodinger's experiment for a moment. Lets assume Schrodinger (referred to as Mr.S from now on because I'm tired of typing his name) has a friend with him while he performs the experiment. Now if Mr.S's friend looks in the box and tells noone what he saw, he ALSO exists in a superposition of states, one where he saw the cat dead and one where he saw the cat alive. This continues until Mr.S asks him what happened, at such time Mr.S also exists in a superposition of states, one where he heard one explanation, and a second where he heard the other. Mr.S stays in a superposition of states until another observer checks the outcome of the experiment with him, and so on. So what made the Universe real, and not a superposition of states? For the universe to exist as a single line and not as a superposition of states, an observer from outside the set (I.E. an observer OUTSIDE the universe) has to exist. Barring that, the Universe DOES exist in a superposition of states, all of which are equally real, with no collapse of the wavefunction possible. One could theorize a "God" who lives (exists?) outside the universe. This leads to an interesting theological discussion. In the bible it states that God created all, made everything come into existence. He also pledged a non-interference pact with the devil, whereas neither of them would enter the universe and affect the lives of mortals (the devil, of course, broke the pact, but that's a different story). So his continued creation of the universe and existence is based merely on his ability to "see and know all". By observing, he causes the wavefront functions to collapse, thereby eliminating all extraneous universes. While the wavefront collapse is random, mabey his power lies in the ability to select which reality he observes causing all versions of reality to collapse except that one.
Assuming, though, that there is no God, or that there is a God, but he doesn't count as an observer and therefore doesn't cause collapse, the universe exists in a superposition of states between which no communication is possible. Now you might ask why we don't notice this happening. After all, even as dense as most people are, they would notice the entire universe splitting into probability matrices, wouldn't they? Well according to aspects of the Everett theory the laws of quantum mechanics do not allow an observer within the set to observe the splitting aspect of the set itself. In a footnote in his paper from July 1957, Everett defended his ideas by pointing out that when Copernicus first suggested the Earth revolves around the sun, this view was criticized on the grounds that if it were, that people would feel the earth moving. This was proved false later on by Newton's mathematics. Similarly, we cannot feel the universes splitting which is proved with quantum mathematics.
"You said that communication between universes is impossible" points out my father "so how can you prove that the many-worlds theory is the correct one?". The ultimate answer, after all the mathematics and scientific jargon are removed is that we cant. It is impossible after looking at all the evidence to prove that ANY theory is correct, the universe seems to be set up this way. At this point science leaves off and faith begins. I have faith that this interpretation is the correct one. Somewhere out there, in the multitudes of realities and what ifs, there is a universe in which a truly feasable government has been devised. There is a universe in which really cool things like bionic implants have been created and are easily available. There is a universe where people as a whole are happy enough that noone needs to take pot or heroin or crack, and where noone ever gets drunk. I quest to get the universe I occupy as close to that one as possible. As a great man once noted, God does not play dice with the universe. He would not leave things to chance. So he plays out EVERY possibility. Plus, this explanation makes for GREAT science fiction.
Bibliography
Treiman, Sam. The odd quantum. Princeton, NJ : Princeton University Press 1999
Gribbin, John. Schrodinger's Kittens and the search for reality. Boston : Little, Brown and Company 1995
Baggot, Jim. The Meaning of quantum theory . Oxford : Oxford University Press 1992
Vigier, J.P. Quantum Implications. London : Routledge and Kegan Paul 1987
