Quantum Mechanics and the Library of Babel: Exploring Many Worlds

The Library of Babel: A Thought Experiment

Let's begin by setting aside quantum mechanics and our current physical theories for a moment. Instead, imagine a universe modeled after Jorge Luis Borges' concept of the Library of Babel. In this vast library, you enter and find yourself surrounded by countless doors, each labeled with a different letter.

If you choose to go through the door labeled 'T', you'll find yourself in a room containing every possible book that begins with the letter T. Continue through the door labeled 'H', and you'll enter a space housing all books starting with 'TH'. This pattern continues, allowing you to navigate through an infinite collection of books containing every possible combination of letters.

Some might argue that this library provides an account of our universe. After all, somewhere within its endless shelves must exist a book that perfectly describes our reality. However, this approach is fundamentally flawed. It lacks any meaningful constraints or predictions about what kinds of universes are likely to occur.

The Many Worlds Interpretation: A Brief Overview

The Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics, first proposed by Hugh Everett III in 1957, shares some similarities with our Library of Babel thought experiment. At its core, MWI suggests that all possible alternate histories and futures are real, each representing an actual 'world' or 'universe'.

While this interpretation has gained popularity among some physicists and philosophers, it faces several significant challenges. One of the most pressing issues is its inability to narrow down which types of worlds we should expect to observe among the vast array of possibilities it presents.

The Problem of Super Maverick Branches

When discussing MWI, physicists often talk about 'maverick branches' - unlikely quantum outcomes that deviate significantly from our everyday experiences. However, if we take the Many Worlds picture seriously, we must also consider what we might call 'super maverick branches'.

These are branches of reality so bizarre that they don't conform to any rules or patterns we might try to establish. Once we include these super maverick branches in our consideration, we find ourselves back in a situation similar to the Library of Babel - explaining everything but predicting nothing.

The Need for Constraints in Scientific Theories

A fundamental requirement for any useful scientific theory is its ability to make predictions and rule out certain possibilities. If a theory allows for anything and everything to happen, it becomes vacuous and loses its explanatory power.

This is precisely why many scientists and philosophers remain skeptical of the Many Worlds Interpretation. While it offers an elegant solution to some quantum paradoxes, it struggles to provide a mechanism for constraining which types of worlds we should expect to observe.

Practical Applications of Many Worlds: Teaching Quantum Computing

Despite its philosophical challenges, the Many Worlds Interpretation can be a useful pedagogical tool, particularly when teaching concepts in quantum computing. For example, when explaining how a qubit can be affected by a controlled NOT gate (CNOT gate), the Many Worlds perspective can help students grasp the concept of decoherence.

In this context, one might explain that the second qubit effectively 'measures' the state of the first qubit. This measurement-like interaction causes the first qubit to decohere from the perspective of an observer who only looks at that qubit. While this explanation isn't a full endorsement of MWI, it provides a mental model that many students find helpful.

The Importance of Accounting for Experience

Any interpretation of quantum mechanics must ultimately account for our subjective experiences. As the ancient Greek philosopher Democritus pointed out, we can't ignore our senses when they provide the very evidence upon which we base our scientific theories.

This presents a challenge for the Many Worlds Interpretation. While it's possible to derive something resembling standard quantum mechanical predictions from MWI with additional assumptions about observers and their connection to the physical world, this derivation is not automatic or straightforward.

The Born Rule and Probability in Quantum Mechanics

One of the most significant challenges for the Many Worlds Interpretation is deriving the Born rule, which gives us the probabilities of different measurement outcomes in quantum mechanics. Despite numerous attempts, no one has successfully derived the Born rule from MWI without introducing additional assumptions.

However, it's worth noting that this problem isn't unique to MWI. Any interpretation of quantum mechanics that starts with a deterministic picture will struggle to explain the origin of probabilities in quantum measurements.

The 'Stone Soup' Problem in Many Worlds

One of the often-touted advantages of the Many Worlds Interpretation is its simplicity. Proponents argue that it requires only the Schrödinger equation and unitary evolution, with perhaps one or two additional postulates. However, this simplicity is somewhat illusory.

To illustrate this, we can use the metaphor of 'stone soup' from the famous folktale. In the story, clever travelers convince townspeople to contribute ingredients to a soup that supposedly only requires water and stones. By the end, they've created a rich, hearty soup - but not from stones alone.

Similarly, to make the Many Worlds Interpretation work, its proponents often need to add more and more postulates and assumptions. Many of these additions are highly esoteric and difficult to verify empirically. This 'stone soup' problem undermines the claimed simplicity of MWI.

The Challenge of Assigning Probabilities in Many Worlds

Even if we accept that we can't derive the Born rule from MWI and decide to add it as an extra axiom, we encounter another problem. There are strong arguments suggesting that if we assign probabilities to branches in MWI at all, any rule other than the Born rule leads to nonsensical results.

However, there's a deeper issue here. In MWI, the branches themselves aren't fundamental - they emerge approximately through the process of decoherence. This means we can't assign them fundamental properties like probabilities in our axioms. It would be like trying to assign properties to tables and chairs in the axioms of a theory of chemistry.

Rational Decision Theory in Many Worlds

Some proponents of MWI, like David Deutsch and David Wallace, have attempted to sidestep this problem by appealing to rational decision theory. They argue that observers within the many-worlds context should act as if the probabilities follow the Born rule, and that this is what we mean by probabilities in this context.

However, this approach faces its own challenges. It's not clear what 'should' means in a many-worlds universe where uncountably many copies of observers do all sorts of things across parallel worlds. These arguments often become circular, assuming what they're trying to prove.

The Quest for Simplicity in Physics

Despite these challenges, it's worth noting that there's a long tradition in physics of striving for simplicity in fundamental theories. From Democritus's atoms in the void to modern particle physics, scientists have often sought to explain complex phenomena using simple building blocks.

The goal is to derive higher-level phenomena like tables, chairs, and trees from these fundamental elements. However, when it comes to explaining the experience of an observer, it seems that something is still missing from our current theories.

The Value of Asking Questions

One point of agreement among many physicists and philosophers is that it's better to acknowledge when we don't have an answer to a question than to claim the question itself is meaningless or forbidden. The ability to ask questions, even if we can't immediately answer them, is crucial for scientific progress.

Conclusion: The Ongoing Debate

The Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics continues to be a topic of intense debate in the physics and philosophy communities. While it offers an intriguing perspective on quantum phenomena, it faces significant challenges in providing a complete and satisfying explanation of our observed reality.

As we continue to grapple with the fundamental nature of quantum mechanics, it's crucial to remain open to new ideas while also subjecting them to rigorous scrutiny. The quest to understand the quantum world is far from over, and each interpretation, including MWI, contributes valuable insights to this ongoing scientific journey.

Whether the Many Worlds Interpretation will ultimately prove to be a useful description of reality or a fascinating thought experiment remains to be seen. What's certain is that the questions it raises continue to push the boundaries of our understanding of quantum mechanics and the nature of reality itself.

Article created from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQVsrbAZty4