The World Tree
Contrary to the way physics is commonly taught in schools on Earth, the future is not singular. It exists as a branching phase-space encompassing all the solutions to the Schrödinger wave equation. Prior to the development of quantum physics, Newtonian mechanics suggested that only one future was possible given a particular starting condition. Following the Einsteinian revolution this one-future, one-past model continued to hold with the caveat that space itself was malleable and time's passage was affected by one's speed and proximity to mass. Newton's and Einstein's equations remain in use because they provide a reasonable approximation of macroscopic reality, but they fail to describe the small-scale systems of which large objects are composed. Maxwell's equations of thermodynamics and the quantum mechanical laws derived from them reveal a universe far weirder and more baroque than primitive science understood.
The Schrödinger wave equation, centerpiece of quantum mechanics, describes many different future states for any system, all of which are equally real. A naïve observer can be convinced that his is the only reality that exists, and the other worldlines in which he observes different outcomes are figments of the mathematical imagination. This conclusion, however, reflects a solipsistic neglect of the overwhelming evidence arrayed before him; the observer clings to his antiquated view of the singular future and cannot provide a mathematical justification for his uniqueness. Niels Bohr was one such person. His Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which unfortunately became the most widely taught, proposed that the Schrödinger wave function "collapsed" upon observation, but provided no mathematical or logical framework to explain what it became or why observation would have this effect. Indeed, he was so desperate to justify his belief that he fell back to thoroughly debunked vitalistic ideas of the nature of consciousness and the incorporeal soul. Albert Einstein, himself the originator of many quantum mechanical concepts, deplored the lack of rigor of this interpretation and famously stated, "God does not play dice with the universe."
Einstein was right. The universe doesn't pick favorites; all that can exist exists somewhere. When a quantum mechanical (i.e., any) system is observed, there is no wave function collapse. Instead, the observer and the system split off into all versions of themselves allowed by the Schrödinger wave equation and each observer is only aware of the single result that corresponds to his particular version of events. This is happening constantly; each instant of every day massive numbers of different versions of us split off to explore our own varying futures. This is not a new idea on Earth: in the 1950s, a graduate student named Hugh Everett, perturbed by the lack of logical coherence of Bohr's explanation, formulated what has come to be known as the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. He followed the simple logical principle that the quantum mechanical equations are to be taken seriously. His was by far the simplest and most elegant explanation of the evidence provided by a half century of experiments, yet the dead wood of academic culture prevented it from getting a fair hearing. Realizing that his yeoman contribution to science would be buried, Everett took a job with the government modeling possible outcomes of nuclear war. In his time, he witnessed many of the scenarios that he modeled come to pass, and eventually developed a passion for Russian roulette. He made quite a handsome sum of money in those worldlines where he survived. Sadly, he is no longer with us in this worldline.
A common objection upon first hearing of the way the worldlines work is the following: what about conservation of energy and mass? This arises from a pair of misconceptions. First, mass-energy is in fact not conserved in the universe; on average the amount stays constant, but the Schrödinger wave equation allows mass-energy to spontaneously appear and disappear. The microscopic structure of space is filled with a foam of such ephemeral phenomena. Though it is rare, macroscopic objects and even whole worlds have been known to spontaneously form themselves from the raw vacuum of space. Secondly, the branching of worldlines has nothing to do with energy content. Complexity increases exponentially with the arrow of time, and the energy density of the universe decreases with cosmic expansion. The worldlines branch off into a fifth dimension at right angles to the fourth dimension of time. When observed from the higher special dimensions, the 3+2 dimensional reality in which we exist appears as a bushy object with a trunk in the past and innumerable branches in the future. This 5-dimensional object is called the world tree: we climb upward along the branches, and if we fall we take heart that another one of us is still climbing his branch.
This reality has philosophical implications. Both free will and determinism are correct: the course of one's worldline is determined by the choices one makes, yet all possible choices and destinies are accounted for amongst the branches of the world tree. It takes some getting used to, but a coherent understanding of reality requires comprehension of the nature of the many worlds. An excellent benefit of this knowledge is a certain equanimity in the face of mortality. We each live every possible version of our lives. Somewhere amongst the many worldlines, versions of everyone ever born are still alive.
The Schrödinger wave equation, centerpiece of quantum mechanics, describes many different future states for any system, all of which are equally real. A naïve observer can be convinced that his is the only reality that exists, and the other worldlines in which he observes different outcomes are figments of the mathematical imagination. This conclusion, however, reflects a solipsistic neglect of the overwhelming evidence arrayed before him; the observer clings to his antiquated view of the singular future and cannot provide a mathematical justification for his uniqueness. Niels Bohr was one such person. His Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which unfortunately became the most widely taught, proposed that the Schrödinger wave function "collapsed" upon observation, but provided no mathematical or logical framework to explain what it became or why observation would have this effect. Indeed, he was so desperate to justify his belief that he fell back to thoroughly debunked vitalistic ideas of the nature of consciousness and the incorporeal soul. Albert Einstein, himself the originator of many quantum mechanical concepts, deplored the lack of rigor of this interpretation and famously stated, "God does not play dice with the universe."
Einstein was right. The universe doesn't pick favorites; all that can exist exists somewhere. When a quantum mechanical (i.e., any) system is observed, there is no wave function collapse. Instead, the observer and the system split off into all versions of themselves allowed by the Schrödinger wave equation and each observer is only aware of the single result that corresponds to his particular version of events. This is happening constantly; each instant of every day massive numbers of different versions of us split off to explore our own varying futures. This is not a new idea on Earth: in the 1950s, a graduate student named Hugh Everett, perturbed by the lack of logical coherence of Bohr's explanation, formulated what has come to be known as the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. He followed the simple logical principle that the quantum mechanical equations are to be taken seriously. His was by far the simplest and most elegant explanation of the evidence provided by a half century of experiments, yet the dead wood of academic culture prevented it from getting a fair hearing. Realizing that his yeoman contribution to science would be buried, Everett took a job with the government modeling possible outcomes of nuclear war. In his time, he witnessed many of the scenarios that he modeled come to pass, and eventually developed a passion for Russian roulette. He made quite a handsome sum of money in those worldlines where he survived. Sadly, he is no longer with us in this worldline.
A common objection upon first hearing of the way the worldlines work is the following: what about conservation of energy and mass? This arises from a pair of misconceptions. First, mass-energy is in fact not conserved in the universe; on average the amount stays constant, but the Schrödinger wave equation allows mass-energy to spontaneously appear and disappear. The microscopic structure of space is filled with a foam of such ephemeral phenomena. Though it is rare, macroscopic objects and even whole worlds have been known to spontaneously form themselves from the raw vacuum of space. Secondly, the branching of worldlines has nothing to do with energy content. Complexity increases exponentially with the arrow of time, and the energy density of the universe decreases with cosmic expansion. The worldlines branch off into a fifth dimension at right angles to the fourth dimension of time. When observed from the higher special dimensions, the 3+2 dimensional reality in which we exist appears as a bushy object with a trunk in the past and innumerable branches in the future. This 5-dimensional object is called the world tree: we climb upward along the branches, and if we fall we take heart that another one of us is still climbing his branch.
This reality has philosophical implications. Both free will and determinism are correct: the course of one's worldline is determined by the choices one makes, yet all possible choices and destinies are accounted for amongst the branches of the world tree. It takes some getting used to, but a coherent understanding of reality requires comprehension of the nature of the many worlds. An excellent benefit of this knowledge is a certain equanimity in the face of mortality. We each live every possible version of our lives. Somewhere amongst the many worldlines, versions of everyone ever born are still alive.
Comments
Post a Comment