this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2025
85 points (89.0% liked)

Ask Science

12242 readers
133 users here now

Ask a science question, get a science answer.


Community Rules


Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.


Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.


Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.


Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.


Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.


Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.


Rule 7: Report violations.Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.


Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.


Rule 9: Source required for answers.Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.


By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.

We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I guess I've always been confused by the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Physics and the fact that it's taken seriously. Like is there any proof at all that universes outside of our own exist?

I admit that I might be dumb, but, how does one look at atoms and say "My God! There must be many worlds than just our one?"

I just never understood how Many Worlds Interpretation was valid, with my, admittedly limited understanding, it just seemed to be a wild guess no more strange than a lot things we consider too outlandish to humor.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The interpretation has to get pretty complicated to explain why all outcomes of an experiment happen, but only one is ever observed.

But they are all observed, that's the point.

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

By who? If I measure the spin of an electron in a superposition of up and down, I only ever get one result, up or down.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

By the versions of you in each branch.

[–] SmoothOperator@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

But which one am I? You postulate that "I" am somehow split into endless copies upon observation, but also "I" am only one of those copies somehow chosen at randomly according to the wave function distribution. So "I" see all outcomes of the experiment but "I" also only see one of them?

This is where it stops being simple to me.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago

What you are describing is essentially another facet of The Vertiginous Question - why am I me instead of someone else. Importantly, this is a problem that exists regardless of whether MWI is true or not, so the lack of simplicity already exists, like it or not.

Before you were born, the future contained the creation of a vast number of conscious beings, but only one of them would be "you", seemingly chosen at random.

The branching of the observers wave function is exactly the same situation.

It's a question about Philosophy of Consciousness, which is well and truly outside the purview of Quantum Physics. From the scientific perspective it's perfectly logical and sufficient to say that "there is one observer who will split into many, each of which will have its own perspective that is unaware of the others".