The Born Interpretation of the wave function gives only the relative frequencies as the number of observations approaches infinity. Using the Many-Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics, specifically the fact that there must exist other versions of ourselves in the multiverse, I show that the observed frequencies should approach the Born frequencies as 1/N, where N is the number of observations. In the body of the paper I state this convergence rate precisely as AN EASILY TESTABLE FORMULA. We can therefore test the central claim of the MWI by measuring the convergence rate to the final Born frequency. Conversely, the MWI allows us to calculate this convergence rate.
The Born Interpretation of the wave function gives only the relative frequencies as the number of observations approaches infinity. Using the Many-Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics, specifically the fact that there must exist other versions of ourselves in the multiverse, I show that the observed frequencies should approach the Born frequencies as 1/N, where N is the number of observations. In the body of the paper I state this convergence rate precisely as AN EASILY TESTABLE FORMULA. We can therefore test the central claim of the MWI by measuring the convergence rate to the final Born frequency. Conversely, the MWI allows us to calculate this convergence rate.
Many-Worlds quantum mechanics differs from standard quantum mechanics in that in Many-Worlds, the wave function is a relative density of universes in the multiverse amplitude rather than a probability amplitude. This means that in Many-Worlds, the Born frequencies are approached rather than given a priori. Thus in Many-Worlds the rate of approach to the final frequencies can be calculated and compared with observation. I use Many-Worlds to derive the rate of approach in the double slit experiment, and show that it agrees with observation. Standard quantum theory has never been used to derive an approach formula because it cannot be so used, as has been tacitly acknowledged for 70 years.
Quantum chemists have recorded a huge number of data points which standard quantum mechanics cannot interpret. Many-Worlds quantum mechanics can. Many-Worlds quantum mechanics differs from standard quantum mechanics because in Many-Worlds, the wave function is a relative density of universes in the multiverse amplitude rather than a probability amplitude. In Many-Worlds, the Born frequencies are approached rather than given a priori. Thus in Many-Worlds, the rate of approach to the final frequencies can be calculated and compared with observation. This is a new type of reaction rate. I show how to use Many-Worlds to analyze the breakup of Br2. Such analysis will experimentally test Many-Worlds fermionic and time-dependent quantum mechanics. Conversely, experimental quantum chemistry has become too sophisticated to be analyzed by standard quantum mechanics. Only Many-Worlds can do the job
We propose a set of simple quantum optics experiments that test for an entirely new domain of physical laws that govern how an individual's conscious experience traverses the multiverse within Everett's many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. These experiments imply an exception to the Born rule in a proposed ''observer-specific'' reference frame. These experiments must be done by you, the reader. If it is performed by anyone else, other than you, the reader, you will observe that the person performing the experiment will observe an outcome that is not special, interesting, or different from what is already known about quantum mechanics. To the best of our knowledge, this would be the first ever modern experiment that is only meaningful if the experiment is performed by you, the reader, and cannot be inferred from the results of another experimenter. Therefore, since each individual must perform this test on his or her own, we outline a set of real experiments that can be easily performed such that as many people as possible can individually verify this for themselves. We do not know or specify what specific physical laws exist within this ''observer-specific'' domain, but come up with a number of different tests to cover as many theories as possible.
The Many Worlds Interpretation (MWI) famously avoids the issue of wave function collapse. Different MWI trees representing the same quantum events can have different topologies, depending upon the observer. However, they are all isomorphic to the group of block universes containing all of the outcomes of all of the events, and so, in that sense, the group of block universes is a more fundamental representation. Different branches of the MWI tree, representing different universes in MWI, ultimately share the same quantum state in a common ancestor branch. This branching topology is incompatible with that of the Minkowski block universe; the resolution is to replace the branches with discrete, parallel block universes, each of which extends from the trunk to the outermost twigs. The number of universes in a branch is proportional to its thickness which, in turn, depends upon the absolute square of the probability amplitude for the state in that branch. Every quantum event may be represented by a kernel of universes, which is the smallest group of universes that will reproduce the quantum probabilities of the outcomes of that event. By considering the ratios of the probabilities of the outcomes of any event, it can be shown that the number of universes in every kernel must finite, as must be the total number of universes in the multiverse. Further, every universe in the multiverse must be finite both in space and time. Another consequence is that quantum probabilities must be rational, which suggests that quantum mechanics is only an approximation to a discrete theory. A corollary is that not every conceivable universe exists in the multiverse, no doubt to the disappointment of those who enjoy alternate-history novels.
The many-worlds interpretation (MWI) of quantum mechanics poses a simple question. What would reality look like if everything evolved in time according to the same quantum equations? There is an attractive consistency to treating microscopic objects, measuring devices, and observers all on the same footing, but do the predictions match our observations? Here, we build a model for a bolometer detector making a which-path measurement in an atom interferometer. We discuss the MWI claim that, while both measurement outcomes occur in each experimental iteration, an observer will experience only one outcome or the other, with a probability consistent with experiment. Finally, we discuss how MWI does not have action at a distance. This article is written to be accessible to anyone with an undergraduate course in quantum mechanics.
Quantum nonlocality is shown to be an artifact of the Copenhagen interpretation, in which each observed quantity has exactly one value at any instant. In reality, all physical systems obey quantum mechanics, which obeys no such rule. Locality is restored if observed and observer are both assumed to obey quantum mechanics, as in the many-worlds interpretation (MWI). Using the MWI, I show that the quantum side of Bell's inequality, generally believed nonlocal, is really due to a series of three measurements (not two as in the standard, oversimplified analysis), all three of which have only local effects. Thus, experiments confirming "nonlocality" are actually confirming the MWI. The mistaken interpretation of nonlocality experiments depends crucially on a question-begging version of the Born interpretation, which makes sense only in "collapse" versions of quantum theory, about the meaning of the modulus of the wave function, so I use the interpretation based on the MWI, namely that the wave function is a world density amplitude, not a probability amplitude. This view allows the Born interpretation to be derived directly from the Schrödinger equation, by applying the Schrödinger equation to both the observed and the observer.