Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1107.3425

Derivation of the probability law in the many-worlds, one-MIND interpretation

Casey Blood

Published Jul 18, 2011• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The basic mathematical structure, QM-A, of the many worlds interpretation consists solely of the linear mathematics plus the Hilbert space properties of the state vectors. There is no collapse and there are no particles or hidden variables. It is remarkable that QM-A alone can account for all our observations except probability. There is no need for particles, hidden variables or collapse to explain perception of only one classical version of reality, the photoelectric effect, localized effects from a spread-out wave function in scattering and interference experiments, wave-particle duality, and so on. But probability cannot be defined within QM-A. Nevertheless, because of its astonishing success, it seems reasonable to require (1) that the mathematics of an interpretation be limited to the highly successful QM-A and (2) that "matter" be composed of state vectors alone. But the probability law requires, in essence, that one version of the observer be singled out. The most straightforward way to accomplish this under (1) and (2) is to assume there is an aspect of the observer-the Mind-which is outside the laws of quantum mechanics and perceives just one version of reality. Under that assumption, the probability law can then be derived. Thus we have an interpretation, QM-A plus "outside" observer, which explains all our perceptions.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1107.3425

Related papers

Problems with Probability in Everett's Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics

Casey Blood

In the many-worlds interpretations (MWIs) of Everett and others, if I am the observer, there are several versions of me but no version is singled out as the one corresponding to my perceptions. However, it can be shown that the probability law implies one version must be singled out. Thus MWIs do not provide a sufficient basis for probability. If we are to have an acceptable description of the physical universe, MWIs must be supplemented by some mechanism, such as hidden variables or collapse, that singles out one version of the observer as the perceiving version.

arXiv:0901.0952•Jan 8, 2009•3 citations

The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is Fatally Flawed

Casey Blood

The linear mathematics of quantum mechanics gives many versions of reality instead of the single version we perceive, with the perceived version chosen at random according to a probability law. Because of these peculiarities, the theory requires an interpretation to be fully understood. Over 50 years ago, Everett proposed in his many-worlds interpretation that these characteristics could be accounted for if the mathematics itself, with no collapse or hidden variables, was carefully analyzed. We show this is incorrect; the linear mathematics cannot account for the probability law. Thus the many-worlds interpretation is not viable. Some mechanism, such as collapse or hidden variables, must be added to obtain a satisfactory understanding of the physical universe.

arXiv:1010.4767•Oct 20, 2010•1 citation

A simple means for deriving quantum mechanics

Eric Tesse

A type of mechanics will be presented that possesses some distinctive properties. On the one hand, its physical description & rules of operation are readily comprehensible & intuitively clear. On the other, it fully satisfies all observable predictions of non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Within it, particles exist at points in space, follow continuous, piecewise differentiable paths, and their linear momentum is equal to their mass times their velocity along their path. Yet the probabilities for position and momentum, conditioned on the state of the particle's environment, follow the rules of quantum theory. Indeed, all observable consequences of quantum theory are satisfied; particles can be entangled, have intrinsic spin, this spin is not local to the particle, particle identity can effect probabilities, and so forth. All the rules of quantum mechanics are obeyed, and all arise in a straightforward fashion. After this is established, connections will be drawn out between this type of mechanics and other types of quantum worlds; those that obey Bohmian mechanics, stochastic mechanics, the many worlds interpretation, and physical collapse. In the final section, a relativistic version of the mechanics will be presented.

quant-pharXiv:2602.04524•Feb 5, 2026•0 citations

The Many Worlds Interpretation

Jonathan Allday

The hidden variable theories are, more cumbersome and artificial—while the Copenhagen interpretation is hopelessly incomplete because of its a priori reliance on classical physics, as well as a philosophic monstrosity with a “reality” concept for the macroscopic world and denial of the same for microcosm. In recent work on the Everett (Many-Worlds) interpretation of quantum mechanics, it has increasingly been recognized that any version of the interpretation worth defending will be one in which the basic formalism of quantum mechanics is left unchanged. Properties such as the interpretation of wave-function as describing a multiverse of branching worlds, or the ascription of probabilities to the branching events, must be emergent from the unitary quantum mechanics rather than added explicitly to the mathematics. Deutsch’s strategy was to introduce a few assumptions from decision theory into the Everett interpretation and then to show how they work with quantum theory to create a natural value measure that is the same as the expectation value.

CRC Press eBooks•Sep 21, 2022•1 citation

No Evidence for Particles

Casey Blood

There are a number of experiments and observations that appear to argue for the existence of particles, including the photoelectric and Compton effects, exposure of only one film grain by a spread-out photon wave function, and particle-like trajectories in bubble chambers. It can be shown, however, that all the particle-like phenomena can be explained by using properties of the wave functions/state vectors alone. Thus there is no evidence for particles. Wave-particle duality arises because the wave functions alone have both wave-like and particle-like properties. Further the results of the Bell-Aspect experiment and other experiments on entangled systems, which seem to imply peculiar properties for particles if they exist, are easily and naturally understood if reality consists of the state vectors alone. The linear equation-Hilbert space structure for the state vectors, by itself, can explain every mystery in quantum mechanics except the origin of the probability law.

arXiv:0807.3930•Jul 24, 2008•8 citations

ON THE ORIGIN OF PROBABILITY IN QUANTUM MECHANICS

Stephen D. H. Hsu

I give a brief introduction to many worlds or "no wave function collapse" quantum mechanics, suitable for non-specialists. I then discuss the origin of probability in such formulations, distinguishing between objective and subjective notions of probability.

arXiv:1110.0549•Modern Physics Letters A•Apr 3, 2012•14 citations
The basic mathematical structure, QM-A, of the many worlds interpretation consists solely of the linear mathematics plus the Hilbert space properties of the state vectors. There is no collapse and there are no particles or hidden variables. It is remarkable that QM-A alone can account for all our observations except probability. There is no need for particles, hidden variables or collapse to explain perception of only one classical version of reality, the photoelectric effect, localized effects from a spread-out wave function in scattering and interference experiments, wave-particle duality, and so on. But probability cannot be defined within QM-A. Nevertheless, because of its astonishing success, it seems reasonable to require (1) that the mathematics of an interpretation be limited to the highly successful QM-A and (2) that "matter" be composed of state vectors alone. But the probability law requires, in essence, that one version of the observer be singled out. The most straightforward way to accomplish this under (1) and (2) is to assume there is an aspect of the observer-the Mind-which is outside the laws of quantum mechanics and perceives just one version of reality. Under that assumption, the probability law can then be derived. Thus we have an interpretation, QM-A plus "outside" observer, which explains all our perceptions.
In the many-worlds interpretations (MWIs) of Everett and others, if I am the observer, there are several versions of me but no version is singled out as the one corresponding to my perceptions. However, it can be shown that the probability law implies one version must be singled out. Thus MWIs do not provide a sufficient basis for probability. If we are to have an acceptable description of the physical universe, MWIs must be supplemented by some mechanism, such as hidden variables or collapse, that singles out one version of the observer as the perceiving version.
The linear mathematics of quantum mechanics gives many versions of reality instead of the single version we perceive, with the perceived version chosen at random according to a probability law. Because of these peculiarities, the theory requires an interpretation to be fully understood. Over 50 years ago, Everett proposed in his many-worlds interpretation that these characteristics could be accounted for if the mathematics itself, with no collapse or hidden variables, was carefully analyzed. We show this is incorrect; the linear mathematics cannot account for the probability law. Thus the many-worlds interpretation is not viable. Some mechanism, such as collapse or hidden variables, must be added to obtain a satisfactory understanding of the physical universe.
A type of mechanics will be presented that possesses some distinctive properties. On the one hand, its physical description & rules of operation are readily comprehensible & intuitively clear. On the other, it fully satisfies all observable predictions of non-relativistic quantum mechanics. Within it, particles exist at points in space, follow continuous, piecewise differentiable paths, and their linear momentum is equal to their mass times their velocity along their path. Yet the probabilities for position and momentum, conditioned on the state of the particle's environment, follow the rules of quantum theory. Indeed, all observable consequences of quantum theory are satisfied; particles can be entangled, have intrinsic spin, this spin is not local to the particle, particle identity can effect probabilities, and so forth. All the rules of quantum mechanics are obeyed, and all arise in a straightforward fashion. After this is established, connections will be drawn out between this type of mechanics and other types of quantum worlds; those that obey Bohmian mechanics, stochastic mechanics, the many worlds interpretation, and physical collapse. In the final section, a relativistic version of the mechanics will be presented.
The hidden variable theories are, more cumbersome and artificial—while the Copenhagen interpretation is hopelessly incomplete because of its a priori reliance on classical physics, as well as a philosophic monstrosity with a “reality” concept for the macroscopic world and denial of the same for microcosm. In recent work on the Everett (Many-Worlds) interpretation of quantum mechanics, it has increasingly been recognized that any version of the interpretation worth defending will be one in which the basic formalism of quantum mechanics is left unchanged. Properties such as the interpretation of wave-function as describing a multiverse of branching worlds, or the ascription of probabilities to the branching events, must be emergent from the unitary quantum mechanics rather than added explicitly to the mathematics. Deutsch’s strategy was to introduce a few assumptions from decision theory into the Everett interpretation and then to show how they work with quantum theory to create a natural value measure that is the same as the expectation value.
There are a number of experiments and observations that appear to argue for the existence of particles, including the photoelectric and Compton effects, exposure of only one film grain by a spread-out photon wave function, and particle-like trajectories in bubble chambers. It can be shown, however, that all the particle-like phenomena can be explained by using properties of the wave functions/state vectors alone. Thus there is no evidence for particles. Wave-particle duality arises because the wave functions alone have both wave-like and particle-like properties. Further the results of the Bell-Aspect experiment and other experiments on entangled systems, which seem to imply peculiar properties for particles if they exist, are easily and naturally understood if reality consists of the state vectors alone. The linear equation-Hilbert space structure for the state vectors, by itself, can explain every mystery in quantum mechanics except the origin of the probability law.