One of the most remarkable ideas in this theoretical framework is that the definite properties of objects that we associate with classical physics — position and speed, say — are selected from a menu of quantum possibilities in a process loosely analogous to natural selection in evolution: The properties that survive are in some sense the “fittest.” As in natural selection, the survivors are those that make the most copies of themselves. This means that many independent observers can make measurements of a quantum system and agree on the outcome — a hallmark of classical behavior.
This idea, called quantum Darwinism (QD), explains a lot about why we experience the world the way we do rather than in the peculiar way it manifests at the scale of atoms and fundamental particles. Although aspects of the puzzle remain unresolved, QD helps heal the apparent rift between quantum and classical physics.
Philip Ball, “Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests” at Quanta
They found that it worked in an artificial environment.
But although these studies seem consistent with QD, they can’t be taken as proof that it is the sole description for the emergence of classicality, or even that it’s wholly correct. For one thing, says Cabello, the three experiments offer only schematic versions of what a real environment consists of. What’s more, the experiments don’t cleanly rule out other ways to view the emergence of classicality.
Philip Ball, “Quantum Darwinism, an Idea to Explain Objective Reality, Passes First Tests” at Quanta
But at least they found a job for Darwinism. Wait a minute! Wasn’t there cosmic Darwinism a decade ago? Yes, here. And quantum Darwinism whistled through in 2016 too.
We shall see.
Follow UD News at Twitter!
Well golly gee whiz, not only can the ‘designer substitute’ of natural selection create the overwhelming ‘appearance of design’ in biology, but apparently natural selection can now also be a stand in for God so as to explain quantum wave collapse and thus explain the continual existence of the universe itself.
Apparently, there simply nothing that natural selection, (and a lot of unrestrained imagination), can’t do.
I wonder if they can add this miracle working natural selection stuff to washing detergents so that we may finally get whiter whites?
Of course there will always be others, (i.e. Creationist lunatics), who will not be so easily impressed with this supposedly omnipotent power of natural selection to explain, not only all life in the universe, but apparently now also explain the existence of the universe itself.
“As in natural selection, the survivors are those that make the most copies of themselves.”
Allowing a sub-set to “make the most copies of themselves” should guarantee STAGNATION. And so how does such a system explain whales and bats and sea snakes (air breathing reptiles that lay their eggs on dry land but spend the rest of their lives in the ocean)? Shouldn’t the tiny population of a newly emerging species ALWAYS get swamped by the stagnated “as is”?
But I get the idea that all these new theories are just stuff for downcast atheists to talk about among themselves.
The main flaw in Zurek’s argument is that he presuppose particles, during decoherence, and via entanglement, are somehow influencing the states of other particles:
Zurek is basically arguing that the pointer state of a particular particle is somehow ‘fitter’ than the pointer states of other particles and is influencing and/or “creating replicas” in other particles.
Small problem, decoherence itself, as they themselves admitted in the article, is a process involving a particle becoming quantumly entangled with the environment. And quantum entanglement is proven to be a thoroughly ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, affair that is not explainable by reference to the particles themselves..
Simply put, one cannot appeal to the particles themselves, whether they be ‘pointer particles’ or not, as Zurek is doing, to explain quantum entanglement, but we are forced to appeal to a ‘non-local’ cause that is beyond space-time, matter-energy. Atheistic materialists are at a complete loss to explain how particles can be possibly be correlated,,,
,,, And while atheistic materialists are at a complete loss to explain how particles can be correlated, on the other hand Christian Theists readily have a beyond space-time, matter-energy, cause that they can appeal to in order to explain the quantum non-locality of entanglement:
I’ve said this 1 million times and I’ve posted it multiple times on this site the philosophy of Darwinism is capable of explaining even the universe there is literally nothing it can’t explain. I need no more proof than this it was only a matter of time when they started doing it to the rest of the universe
By the way I’m going to figure out why we are the only fine-tuned universe in all of existence I’m gonna add a dash of natural selection and answer the question right now
Because were the only stable universe that could exist all other universes deteriorated and so our universe was naturally selected because it had the advantage of being stable and having an unequal amount of both dark matter and antimatter when it produced the Big Bang produced the universe Which in turn gave our universe the selective advantage to survive over all the other universes which were unstable
THE END!
Thank you Charles for a theory that is capable of enveloping absolutely anything and everything and need not have proof because everything supports it. it is a philosophy It is metaphysics
With this theory I deserve a PhD in every form of science
you know now I’m just getting annoyed, If you can’t figure it out just add Darwinism
Seeing that this is the second paper in a row from Philip Ball that more or less proves that he does not know what he is talking about when it comes to quantum mechanics, I think Ball should take a break from trying to author articles on Quantum Mechanics. Here is a scathing review of Ball’s last article before this one: In particular, here is the last sentence:
Here is a fuller excerpt from the article:
He is equally scathing of Ball’s current article on “Quantum Darwinism”:
Guys guys guys I got something! Here is the question bare with me here, just follow, what if, just think about it but what if we are allll Boltzmann brains that survived!!! We’re the ones that didn’t degrade into nothing yet just think about it mind blowing isn’t it
Ooooooooooohhhhhhhh
Each one of us is a quantum bubble universe