Tony Smith's Home Page
ManyWorlds Quantum Theory
What Does ManyWorlds Mean?
Cosmology
Quantum Computing
Worlds, Histories, Links, and Vertices
Here is a ManyWorlds FAQ.
What Does ManyWorlds Mean?
In the D4D5E6 model, ManyWorlds means the Everett Relative State
interpretation, with the addition of the interpretation basis of David Deutsch (Int. J.
Theor. Phys 24 (1985) 141) to require that worlds of measure zero occur with zero
probability.
For Deutsch's interpretation basis to be welldefined, kinematic independence in
the distant past must be assumed. Therefore, the ManyWorlds branch toward the
future (not toward the past), and an arrow of time and an entropy can be
defined without using either ensembles or coarse graining such as used in the
decoherence theory of GellMann and Hartle.
Although Everett has said that people cannot feel the other branches of his
ManyWorlds interpretation, Deutsch describes a gedanken experiment in which
an observer can feel himself having been split into two branches that have now
merged into his present branch, in the sense that, although he accurately
remembers only one branch, he can infer that "... there was more than one copy
of himself (and the atom) in existence at that time, and that these copies merged
to form his present self."
Deutsch's paper only constructs the interpretation basis for quantum theories with
finitedimensional state spaces. The construction was not done for field theories or
for relativistic theories. If such construction is done, then, as Deutsch says: "..at
least for those who find Everett's interpretation acceptable, the 'problem of
measurement' and the problem of interpretation of quantum theory in general,
would be solved. Quantum theory could be regarded without reservation as a
universal physical theory."
In its lattice formulation, the D4D5E6 model has, at least locally, a
finitedimensional state space (although the finite dimension is very large) and has
relativistic structure inherent in its D4 lattice structure. Therefore the construction
of Deutsch shows that the fundamental lattice D4D5E6 model with ManyWorlds
quantum theory is an example of a universal physical theory.
ManyWorlds Cosmology
In the D4D5E6 model, interaction is by exchange of gauge bosons. From the
ManyWorlds Quantum Theory viewpoint, an interaction is a measurement of the
quantity (charge, polarization, position, etc.) that is involved in the interaction.
Therefore a graviton interaction can measure the structure of spacetime,
including the selection of a timelike axis and spacelike section that is used in the
local description of the D4D5E6 model.
Since black holes are information sinks for electromagnetic, weak force, and
color force information, such interactions with a black hole are not
measurements that destroy correlations of the time axis and space sections of
spacetime at the black hole.
The CDM black holes of the D4D5E6 model were formed in a single quantum
conformal fluctuation, and so were correlated with respect to time axis and
space sections.
In the cosmology of the D4D5E6 model, the universe is flat due to cold dark
matter (CDM) black holes with mass 10^5 gm.
Gravitational interactions involving local inhomogeneities of mass distribution can
produce the effect of local curvature of spacetime. The tilting of lightcones can
be seen as arising from an effective theory of gravity, whose underlying
fundamental theory of gravity (in the D4D5E6 model) may provide, in principle, a
nontrivial correlation among the lightcones with respect to the fundamental
underlying 4dim Feynman checkerboard structure.
As the universe evolves, quantum vacuum creation of virtual bosons (and
fermionantifermion pairs, and black hole pairs) at any part of spacetime should
occur with respect to the fundamental underlying 4dim Feynman checkerboard
structure, and so be correlated with respect to time axis and space sections.
As the CDM black holes within our universe should retain their correlation, their
4pair graviton interactions with ordinary matter should correlate a particle with
which a CDM blackhole interacts, and a neighborhood of the particles. (To
determine what is meant by "neighborhood", consider that: Planck mass = 10^5
gm; the density of CDM black holes in a presentday flat universe is 4.5 x 10^30
gm/cm^3 = 4.5 x 10^25 CDM black holes/cm^3, and that Avogadro's number =
6 x 10^23 atoms/cm^3.)
The CDM black holes may act like the incoherent dust of Brown and Kuchar to
couple with the metric and introduce into spacetime "a privileged dynamical
reference frame and time foliation. The comoving coordinates of the dust
particles and the proper time along the dust worldlines become canonical
coordinates in the phase space of the system. ... This has three important
consequences. First, the functional Schrodinger equation can be solved by
separating the dust time from the geometric variables. Second, the Hamiltonian
densities strongly commute and therefore can be simultaneously defined by
spectral analysis. Third, the standard constraint system of vacuum gravity is cast
into a form in which it generates a true Lie algebra."
The privileged frame of Brown and Kuchar is consistent with Deutsch's preferred
interpretation basis of states.
Ford describes decoherence from vacuum fluctuations.
Tegmark describes decoherence from scattering processes.
Plaga shows that finite decoherence time may permit experimental
communication of information among the Many Worlds.
Hawking and his students propose that creation of virtual pairs of Planckenergy
black holes (a phenomenon that should also occur in the D4D5E6 model upon
reaching the energy scale of its Planck length lattice) should cause macroscopic
black holes should evaporate down to Planck size and then disappear in the sea
of virtual black holes.
The virtual pairs of Planckenergy black holes are similar to fermion
particleantiparticle pairs and to the quantum information theory virtual
qubitantiqubit pairs of Cerf and Adami, which they call ebitantiebit pairs, that
are related to negative conditional entropies for quantum entangled systems.
ManyWorlds Quantum Computing
A good WWW site on quantum computation is
http://vesta.physics.ucla.edu/~smolin/index.html.
In Baez Week 34, John Baez describes quantum computing:
It's easiest to see why machines that take advantage of quantum theory might be
efficient at computation if we think in terms of path integrals. In Feynman's
pathintegral approach to quantum theory, the probability of getting from state A
at time zero to state B some later time is obtained by integrating the exponential
of the action
exp(iS/hbar)
over *all* paths from A to B, and then taking the absolute value squared. (Here
we are thinking of states A and B that correspond to points in the classical
configuration space.) We can think of the quantum system as proceeding along
all paths simultaneously; it is the constructive or destructive interference between
paths due to the phases exp(iS/hbar) that makes certain final outcomes B more
likely than others. In many situations, there is massive destructive interference
except among paths very close to those which are critical points of the action S;
the latter are the *classical* paths. So in a sense, a classical device functions as it
does by executing all possible motions; motions far from those satisfying Newton's
laws simply cancel out by destructive interference! (There are many other ways
of thinking about quantum theory; this one can be difficult to make
mathematically rigorous, but it's often very handy.)
This raises the idea of building a computer that would take advantage of
quantum theory by trying out all sorts of paths, but making sure that paths that
give the wrong answer cancel out! It seems that Feynman was the first to seriously
consider quantum computation: Simulating physics with computers, by Richard
Feynman, International Journal of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 21, nos. 6/7, pp.
467488 (1982).
The article of Baez is motivated by a paper of Peter Shor, described by David
DiVincenzo as showing that on a quantum computer, prime factoring can be
performed in polynomial time, as opposed to exponential time that is thought to
be required by a classical computer. The main result of DiVincenzo's paper is that
2bit gates are universal for quantum computation.
Quantum information processing rules are somewhat different from those of
classical information theory. For instance (Ekert, Nature 367 (10 Feb 94) 513514)
Benjamin Schumacher has shown that for quantum 2state systems there is a
lower bound on the number of quantum bits per symbol and that the lower bound
is LESS than the classical entropy of the Shannon noiseless coding theorem. The
relevant difference is that two distinguishable symbolstate preparations can
produce two different symbolstates that CANNOT be reliably distinguished.
Walsh functions (boolean analogues of Fourier basis functions) are a class of
balanced functions that are distinguishable quickly and WITHOUT ERROR by
quantum computation. A classical computer could distinguish them quickly only if
some (perhaps small) error were to be allowed. (Bennett, Nature 362 (22 Apr 93)
694695, describing the work of David Deutsch and Richard Jozsa, and of Ethan
Bernstein and Umesh Vazirani)
The similarity of the balanced function illustrations to bar codes makes me think of
bosonic optical quantum computing rather than fermionic solidstate quantum
computers (which are probably very hard to fabricate).
One problem that would be a nice application for quantum computing is the
travelling salesman problem. A recent classical advance toward solving that
problem is using a workstation and 50 software ants on a loop who then evolve
(the ants can die or reproduce) to find within 44 hours a solution (accurate to 4
per cent) to the 30,000 point travelling salesman problem. The previous best
classical effort used a Cray for 18 months to solve the 3,000 point problem.
(Arthur, New Scientist 4 Jun 94, p. 6, describing the work at the BT systems
research division of Shara Amin and JoseLouis Fernandez)
In quantph/9503017, Barenco, Deutsch, and Ekert describe a quantum
controlledNOT gate that might be realized by selective driving of optical
resonances of two subsystems undergoing a dipoledipole interaction.
A possible example of such opticallylinked dipoledipole subsystems might be
neural microtubules with light carried through water within the microtubules.
In quantph/9505018, Deutsch, Barenco, and Ekert show that almost every
quantum computation gate that operates on at least 2 bits is a universal gate.
They say:
"We conjecture that the nonuniversal gates are precisely
the 1bit gates and collections of 1bit gates; and
the classical gates.
If true, this would reveal an interesting conection between the existence of a
'classical level' in physics (i.e. a regime in which classical physics is a good
approximation to quantum physics) and the existence of classical computation as
a closed and stable regime within quantum computation."
...
"... the intuitive nature of the classicallyavailable computational operations, ...
allowed pioneers ... to capture the correct classical theory by intuition alone, and
falsely to assume that its foundations were selfevident or at least purely abstract.
(There is an analogy here with geometry, another branch of physics that was
formerly regarded as belonging to mathematics.)"
Cerf and Adami have shown that information theory of quantum computers can
give negative conditional entropies for entangled systems. Therefore negative
virtual information can be carried by particles, and quantum information
processes can be described by particleantiparticle diagrams much like particle
physics diagrams.
Consequently, the underlying structure of ManyWorlds abstract life forms should
be fundamentally similar to that of boson photongraviton life forms and fermion
matter life forms.
Worlds, Histories, Links, and Vertices
Each World of the ManyWorlds D4D5E6 model is described by a configuration
of bosons on links and fermions on vertices in a 4dimensional HyperDiamond
lattice spacetime.
In the D4D5E6 model, the ManyWorlds Sum over Histories is a sum over all paths,
each path being a history in a 4dimensional HyperDiamond lattice spacetime
World.
Each path is a vertexlinkvertexlink...vertex sequence in a D4 lattice spacetime
World.
To the extent two paths coincide, they may be said to be in the same World of
the ManyWorlds. Where they differ, they are in different Worlds.
A given link can only link two nearestneighbor vertices in a 4dimensional
HyperDiamond lattice spacetime World containing that link.
A given vertex can be connected to a nearestneighbor vertex in many possible
4dimensional HyperDiamond lattice spacetime Worlds.
Consider 4dimensional HyperDiamond lattice spacetime, with vertex structure
like this stereo pair representation with blue(+) to red() color coding for the 4th
dimension:
There are 8 links leading away from a given vertex to a nearest neighbor in a
given 4dimensional HyperDiamond lattice World.
The 4 future lightcone links in the 4dimensional HyperDiamond lattice form a
vertex figure that is the future (blue) tetrahedron:
After a 4dimensional rotation, it is clear that the figure can be called a quantum
pentacle:
In the ManyWorlds Quantum Theory, any given vertex may be connected to a
number of 4dimensional HyperDiamond lattice Worlds.
Therefore, each of the 4 quaternionic unit vector HyperDiamond future lightcone
links {(+ 1 +/ i +/ j +/ k)/2 } (with an even number of + signs) at the given vertex is
a SUPERPOSITION of all possible links leading from the given vertex to one of the
possible Worlds.
A given quaternionic unit vector HyperDiamond future lightcone link leading from
the given vertex does not really look like a single link from the given vertex, but like
a bundle of a finite (but large) number of links from the given vertex to destination
vertices, each in its own future history World:
If the links are regarded as such superpositions, the HyperDiamond future
lightcone figure
can be called a HyperDiamond Quantum Pentacle.
In this picture, physics on a single link is reversible.
Irreversibility comes from the branching of the ManyWorlds, manifested by the
fact that a single link is only one part of the superposition of links that is a
quaternionic unit 4dimensional vector originating at the origin vertex.
Consider a given link within the superposition .
By being at the origin vertex at the "start" of the the "experiment", you have
effectively selected a particular World containing the origin vertex.
To select the given link within the superpostion, you must select a particular future
history World at the destination vertex.
Then, the amplitude of each link in a superposition is determined by:
the fermion state of the given origin vertex;
the boson state of each of the other 7 lightcone links at the origin vertex in the
World containing the prior history of the given origin vertex;
the fermion state of the destination vertex; and
the boson state of each of the other 7 lightcone links at the destination vertex in
the World containing the future history of the destination vertex.
The probability of the link (in a sense, the probability of observation of the link) is
the product of amplitude with its complex conjugate, where the complex
conjugate of the amplitude is the amplitude for the same link with past and future
interchanged by time reversal. (Compare the transaction picture of Cramer, Rev.
Mod. Phys. 58 (1986) 647687)
Two Types of Beings:
Massless Lightcone Beings
and
Massive Spacelike Beings
A being made of massless lightcone particles
lives on the boundary of the lightcone. It exists in all times and sees alternative
Worlds branching at all times. The quantum phase, taking values in the helical
covering space of U(1), is the means by which a lightcone being determines the
order of events and how amplitudes interfere. In other words, the quantum phase
is the means by which a lightcone being "tells time".
From the lattice point of view,
the quantum phase is an internal symmetry
related to the coassociative internal symmetry space,
whose relative size to the associative physical spacetime
is the Golden Ratio PHI.
For each physical spacetime timestep,
the phase should advance by PHI radians,
or by the fraction 2 pi / PHI of a circle (about 222.5 degrees).
Although pi is transcendental (e^(i pi) = 1) and PHI is algebraic,
the continued fraction for PHI = 1 + 1/ 1 + 1/ 1 + 1/ 1 + ...
shows that PHI is the most irrational number, and
that steps of 2 pi / PHI give a maximally uniform distribution
of phases throughout time (nonunique, as 2 pi / PHI^2 is just as good,
see Kappraff  Connections, McGrawHill, 1991).
Therefore, a lightcone being always knows when/where it is
by its phase, in a maximally efficient way.
"In a world of light there are neither points nor moments of time; beings woven
from light would live 'nowhere' and 'nowhen'; ... One point of CP3 [the 'Penrose
paradise'] is the whole life history of a free photon  the smallest 'event' that can
happen to light." (Yu. I. Manin, Mathematics and Physics, Birkhauser (1981), pp.
8384)
Lightcone beings in our lowenergy regime could be made up of any massless
(not SU(2) weak bosons or scalar Higgs) and unconfined (not SU(3) gluons) gauge
bosons, i.e., photons and gravitons,
and
of massless neutrino fermions.
For Lightcone beings to be STABLE, they must be made of stable photons,
gravitons, or neutrinos.
A being made of massive spacelike particles
lives in the interior of the lightcone. It has spacelike extent, and evolves in time. It
exists in a limited spacetime neighborhood with one past history (although a few
others may be experimentally detectable) and can see alternative future histories
branching only near its present time.
"What binds us to spacetime is our rest mass, which prevents us from flying at the
speed of light, when time stops and space loses meaning." (Yu. I. Manin,
Mathematics and Physics, Birkhauser (1981), p. 84)
Spacelike beings in our lowenergy regime could be made up of massive SU(2)
weak bosons, scalar Higgs, and confined SU(3) gluons,
and
of massive lepton and quark fermions.
For Spacelike beings to be STABLE, they must be made of stable firstgeneration
massive lepton and quark fermions.
Interactions between STABLE Lightcone beings and Spacelike beings could be
through Lightcone neutrinos, photons, and gravitons interacting with Spacelike
massive firstgeneration lepton and quark fermions.
Penrose, of the CP3 Penrose paradise, has proposed (The Emperor's New Mind,
Oxford (1989), p. 401) that:
"... a nerve signal creates a detectable changing electric field in its surroundings ...
and the onegraviton criterion [for a role of quantum mechanics in brain activity]
might easily be met within these surroundings."
Nerve signals occur in the brain. The structure of the brain is made up of neurons.
In Shadows of the Mind (Oxford (1994)), Penrose (using the work of U. of Arizona
anesthesiologist Stuart Hameroff) looks at the cytoskeleton of each neuron as
being made up of microtubules. Each microtubule is a hollow cylindrical tube with
about 25 nm outside diameter and 14 nm inside diameter, made up of 13
columns of tubulin dimers.
Each dimer is about 8 nm x 4 nm x 4 nm, consists of two parts, alphatubulin and
betatubulin (each made up of about 450 amino acids), and can exist in (at least)
2 different geometrical configurations, or conformations.
The 2 different conformations correspond to 2 different states of the dimer's
electric polarization, determined by the position of a single electron at the
junction of the alphatubulin and the betatubulin.
Through the van der Waals interaction, the state of each dimer would be
influenced by the state of each of its 6 neighbor dimers.
Acting as cellular automata, microtubules could transmit and process complex
signals as waves of polarization states of tubulin dimers.
The 5+8=13 Fibonaccinumber structure of microtubules may be useful in such
signal transmission and processing.
Rhett Savage says
that
"...using quantum field theory, Del Giudice, Vitiello and others
wrote in the eighties that when an imposed electric field tries
to penetrate into a region of coherent or
at least polarized water
then it can do so only confined into filaments ...
outside of the filaments the original coherence
remains undisturbed.
Meanwhile, on the edges of the filaments there are weird
gradient forces which can attract or repel specific molecules
from the surrounding sea;
in this way ... the MTs are assembled.
Each time a molecule is drawn into the filament
by gradient forces then it alters the overall wavefunction
so that the gradient forces chance everywhere
on the filament (nonlocally),
which changes which molecules are attracted and repelled ...
so these gradient forces are like Maxwell's demon
opening and shutting a door with great precision,
assembling the MTs and later serving as their
fundamental sense organ ...
...Del Giudice and friends went on to characterize
other aspects of the filaments.
they noted that a filament would undergo spontaneous symmetry
breakdown and develop Goldstone modes
and associated correlation 
then "the Coherence of the Goldstone correlation which
disappears because of the electromagnetic field propagation
is transferred to to the outgoing electromagnetic field." ...
... [this is] superradiance ...
Del Giudice and friends continue.
they say that the propagating of the resulting coherent
electromagnetic field undergoes a "selffocusing mechanism,"
allowing the field to propagate along the filament...
and, to top it all off, this mechanism is amplified because
the medium of ordered water within the filament is also coherent!
... [this is] selfinduced transparency ...
the resulting picture is very cool: ..."
we start with an oriented polarization in water 
an electromagnetic field is applied,
cracks form in the polarization spontaneously:
these are the filaments that will be tubes.
they selfassemble the tubes from the ambient molecular sea
by a nonlocal Maxwell demon process.
then the tubes eventually serve as the guiding framework
for neurons, etc.  "
The interior of a microtubule contains pure water that may be in an ordered state
that might carry quantumcoherent oscillations (as sound or light waves). Such an
ordered state of water has been observed to extend at least 3 nm outwards
from cytoskeletal surfaces, so that it is not unreasonable to think that the ordered
state could extend throughout the interior of a microtubule of interior diameter 14
nm.
Single microtubules do not extend the entire length of an axon or dendrite, but
they collectively do, each microtubule being connected to neighboring
microtubules by bridges of microtubule associated proteins.
At the presynaptic endings of axons the microtubules terminate anad interact
with soccerball shaped clathrins (made up of protein trimers called clathrin
triskelions) that control the release of neurotransmitter chemicals at synapses.
If the computing operations of the human brain were based on neurons alone,
there would be 10^11 neurons operating at 10^3 signals per second, for a total
throughput of 10^14 operations per second.
If the computing operations of the human brain were based on tubulin dimers,
there would be 10^4 dimers per neuron, or 10^15 dimers, and the operating
speed would be 10^9 operations per second, for a total throughput of 10^24
operations per second.
If the computing operations of the human brain were based on neurons, they
would operate as a classical computer.
If the computing operations of the human brain were based on tubulin dimers,
they could operate at the quantum level of superpositions of dimer polarization
states.
Anesthetics provide some evidence in favor of tubulin dimers as the basis of
human brain activity:
anesthestic action may be due to van der Waals interactions of anesthetics with
the conformational structure of tubulin dimers blocking transitions of polarization
states, causing loss of consciousness; and
anesthetics not only affect the consciousness of higher animals, but, at similar
concentrations, also stop the movement of paramecia, amoebae, and green
slime molds, all of whom rely on microtubules of their cytoskeleton for movement.
It is important to note that, due to the nonlocality of actions on microtubules, the
possibility that different anesthetics may physically attach to different parts of a
microtubule does NOT prove that the dimer is not the basis of human brain
activity. The actions of the various anesthetics at their various sites of attachment
may be nonlocally transmitted through the microtubule to the dimer site, thus
producing anesthesia.
If tubulin dimers of microtubules are the basis of human brain activity, using
quantum superposition of polarization states, then the superpositions should
maintain coherence over the scale of the size of the brain itself, crossing synaptic
barriers between neurons, perhaps by EPRtype entanglements of correlated
states.
If the human brain is then viewed as a quantum computer, perhaps quantum
superpositions could resolve the problem of how a brain capable of
understanding and appreciating the beauty and truth of such things as
mathematical structures, music, and art could be based on a finite computing
machine.
In the D4D5E6 model, virtual 4pair gravitons, which are effectively Planckmass
black holes, could tilt the lightcones of spacetime, resulting in closed timelike
loops. For an illustration of tilted lightcones, see the lightcones in Duchamp's The
Large Glass.
In the D4D5E6 model, such tilted lightcone spacetimes are only a very small
proportion of any quantum superposition describing physical spacetime.
Penrose describes a quantum gravity theory of David Deutsch in which only a
very small fraction of the spacetime geometries in a superposition contain closed
timelike loops. Even the very small fractionof closed timelike loops permit
noncomputable operations to be performed by a humanbrain quantum
computer, which could feed on its own output, running around the closed timelike
loop.
In The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics due to Cramer, Rev.
Mod. Phys. 58 (1986) 647687), the probability of taking a given link in a path
among the Many Worlds is the product of amplitude for that link times the
amplitude for its complex conjugate. Since the complex conjugate amplitude is
the time reversal of the link amplitude, Cramer's picture is that of the present
interacting with the future. The present amplitude makes an "offer" that can be
accepted by a "handshake" with a complex conjugate amplitude "confirmation"
from the future, so that the resulting observation is a "transaction".
Combining the PenroseDeutsch closed timelike loop picture of the mind with
Cramer's transaction picture of sumoverhistories quantum field theory, it is
natural to ask whether the mind might be able to select which of the ManyWorlds
it will experience in the future.
Jack Sarfatti comments on a paper of Hoyle and Narlikar
(Rev. Mod. Phys. 67 (1995) 113155):
Classically, if "we use only retarded electromagnetic waves
that propagate on the future light cone of their source events,
conservation of energy for an accelerating classical point charge
implies HN's Lorentzcovariant tensor eq. 2.2 on p.116
md^2a^i/da^2 = eFret^i k da^k/da +
+ (4/3)e glk(d^3a^i/da^3 da^l/da  d^3a^l/da^3 da^i/da) da^k/da
The first term on the RHS is
the external Lorentz force for the point charge.
The second term involving the third derivative of
the particle's postion relative to the proper time along its world line
is the selfforce or radiation reaction.
This equation cannot be deduced from the Lagrangian of
traditional classical electrodynamics for point charges
in purely retarded causal electromagnetic fields.
It is put in adhoc in order to obey conservation of energy.
If you choose a time symmetric sum of advanced and retarded waves
there is no radiaton and no radiation reaction.
Anticausal advanced waves propagate
on the past light cone of their source events.
Dirac used HN's eq. 2.3
which is half the difference of the retarded and advanced waves.
R^i k = (1/2){Fret^i k  Fadv^i k}
Dirac ... showed that the individual selffields diverge for the point charge,
but their difference is finite and it is exactly equal to
the adhoc radiation reaction term in eq. 2.2 above.
The classical selfforce when quantized is responsible
for the spontaneous emission of bound atomic electrons
in excited energy levels.
This is amazing and highly suggestive
that we are close to the secrets of Einstein's 'Old One'.
...
HN then develop the quantum version of their classical theory
using the Feynman path method.
The quantum 'influence functional' of the future of our Universe
replaces the classical absorber boundary condition.
They show that there are no renormalization infinities
in the delayed actionatadistance theory at the quantum level
because of damping by
the cosmological influence functional of the entire future Universe
on every charged particle ...
[HN say that:]
'... the apparently local behavior of a quantum system
actually involves the response of the Universe
via an influence functional
which arises when we take into account
how the absorber reacts back (via advanced potentials)
on the local system.
The influence functional enters into any probability calculation
in the path integral approach whenever
the effects of external variables on the local system
are integrated out.
It is a double integral over paths and conjugate paths. ...
the conjugate paths arise in the calculation of
probability for spontaneous transition of the atomic electron,
involving the response of the Universe,
when the effects of the individual absorber particles
are integrated out.' p. 147
The congugate paths in this case carry negative energy em waves
propagating backwards in time.
They ... replace the virtual photon vacuum fluctuations
of the traditional quantum electrodynamics."
In the cosmology of the D4D5E6 model, the universe is open.
Does it obey the quantum version of the total absorber boundary condition?
YES, because the open universe is also a totally ManyBranched universe, in the
sense that any future worldline from any chosen point will eventually encounter a
"new universe" branching off from the chosen universe.
A quantum mind could interact with the anticausal advanced conjugate paths
coming from anything in either the future part of the chosen universe or from any
of the new universe ManyBranches.
HOW MIGHT A QUANTUM MIND BE ABLE TO SELECT which of the ManyWorlds it will
experience in the future?
Fred Wolf uses the WATCHEDPOT property of quantum theory to provide the
answer.
The WatchedPot property is just the fact that, if a quantum system is observed
constantly, its state does not change. Therefore, the mind should be able to stay
on a given branch of the ManyWorlds by constantly observing it.
Cerf and Adami have shown that information theory of quantum computers can
give negative conditional entropies for entangled systems. Therefore negative
virtual information can be carried by particles, and quantum information
processes can be described by particleantiparticle diagrams much like particle
physics diagrams.
Consequently, the underlying structure of ManyWorlds abstract life forms should
be fundamentally similar to that of Lightcone life forms and Massive life forms.
To get an idea of how to think about ManyWorlds on lattices,
here is a rough outline of how the Uncertainty Principle works:
Do NOT (as is conventional) say that a particle is
sort of "spread out" around a given location in a given spacetime

x
xxx
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
due to "quantum uncertainty".
Instead, say that the particle is really at a point in spacetime

x
BUT that the "uncertainty spread" is not a property of the
particle, but is due to dynamics of the spacetime,
in which particleantiparticle pairs xo are being created
sort of at random. For example, in one of the ManyWorlds,
the spacetime might not be just

but would have created a particleantiparticle pair

x  o
If the original particle is where we put it to start with,
then in this World we would have

x  o x
Now, if the new o annihilates the original x,
we would have

x
and, since the particles x are indistinguishable from each other,
it would APPEAR that the original particle x was at a different
location, and the probabilities of such appearances would
look like the conventional uncertainty in position.
Tony Smith's Home Page
...
...