On a possibility to find experimental evidence for the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics
- 182 Downloads
The many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics predicts the formation of distinct parallel worlds as a result, of a quantum mechanical measurement. Communication among these parallel worlds would experimentally rule out alternatives to this interpretation. A possible procedure for “interworld” exchange of information and energy, using only state of the art quantum optical equipement, is described. A single ion is isolated from its environment in an ion trap. Then a quantum mechanical measurement with two discrete outcomes is performed on another system, resulting in the formation of two parallel worlds. Depending on the outcome of this measurement the ion is excited from only one of the parallel worlds before the ion decoheres through its interaction with the environment. A detection of this excitation in the other parallel world is direct evidence for the many-worlds interpretation. This method could have important practical applications in physics and beyond.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.W. Heisenberg,The Physicists Conception of Nature (Hutchinson, London, 1958).Google Scholar
- 4.N. Bohr,Atomic Theory and the Description of Human Knowledge (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1934), p. 19.Google Scholar
- 9.A review on the issue EPR correlations is: D. N. Mermin,Phys. Today 39(4), 38 (1985). The most recent experiments are: P. R. Rapster, J. G. Rarity, and P. C. M. Owens,Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 1923 (1994); P. G. Kwiat, A. M. Steinberg, and R. Y. Chiao,Phys. Rev. A. 47, R2427 (1993); T. E. Kiess, Y. H. Shih, A. V. Sergienko, and C. O. Alley,Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3893 (1993).Google Scholar
- 11.M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle, inProceedings International Symposium Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, S. Kobayashi et al. eds. (The Physical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1989), p. 321 the remark can be found in the discussion section in response to a question by P. Mittelstaedt.Google Scholar
- 12.R. B. Griffiths,Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 2201 (1993). M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle,Phys. Rev. D 47, 3345 (1993). Exhaustive and pedagogic lectures can be found in: J. B. Hartle, inQuantum Cosmology and Baby Universes, S. Coleman,et al., eds. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1991), p. 67.CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- 13.H. Everett III, inThe Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechnics, B. S. DeWitt and N. Graham, eds. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1973), p. 3. H. Everett III,Rev. Mod. Phys. 29, 454 (1957). Note that the first reference constitutes the original work of Everett. It contains, a clear statement of the incompatibility of his interpretation with the Copenhagen interpetation in the discussion section on pp. 109–119. This opinion appears only in a much weakened form in the journal article.Google Scholar
- 15.Occasionally the MWI is interpreted in a way in which the “splitting” requires some new mechanism outside of known physics; see e.g., M. A. B. Whitaker,J. Phys. A 18, 253 (1985). The assumption of such a mechanism leads to various problems with the MWI as discussed in this reference. I hold the view that one is led inevitably (and without further mechanisms) to the MWI if one assumes that the Schrödinger equation is a complete and objective description of reality and takes into account decoherence. A similar view is voiced by Zurek who finds the MWI “unsatisfying”; however, see the discussion section to his article: W.H. Zurek, inConceptual Problems of Quantum Gravity, A. Ashtekar and J. Stachel, eds. (Birkhäuser, Boston, 1991), p. 43.CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
- 27.L. Stodolsky, inQuantum Coherence, J. S. Anandan, ed. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1990), p. 320.Google Scholar
- 30.L. I. Schiff,Quantum Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1985), 3rd edn. Chap. 14,Google Scholar
- 35.M. Sargent, III, M. O. Scully, and W. E. Lamb,Laser Physics (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts, 1974), p. 27.Google Scholar
- 42.M. Gell-Mann and J. B. Hartle, “Equivalent sets of histories and multiple quasiclassical domains,” preprint, University of California at Santa Barbara UCSBTH-94-09 (1994).Google Scholar