The measure problem in no-collapse (many worlds) quantum mechanics

TL;DR

This paper examines the measure problem in no-collapse quantum mechanics, highlighting issues with defining probabilities and the implications for the Everett interpretation and the emergence of classical reality.

Contribution

It critically analyzes the assumptions behind probability measures in many-worlds quantum mechanics and questions their physical and philosophical foundations.

Findings

Decision-theoretic derivations are circular

Ab initio measures rely on primitives beyond the wavefunction

The measure problem impacts the interpretation of quantum probabilities

Abstract

We explain the measure problem (cf. origin of the Born probability rule) in no-collapse quantum mechanics. Everett defined maverick branches of the state vector as those on which the usual Born probability rule fails to hold -- these branches exhibit highly improbable behaviors, including possibly the breakdown of decoherence or even the absence of an emergent semi-classical reality. Derivations of the Born rule which originate in decision theory or subjective probability (i.e., the reasoning of individual observers) do not resolve this problem, because they are circular: they assume, a priori, that the observer occupies a non-maverick branch. An ab initio probability measure is sometimes assumed to explain why we do not occupy a maverick branch. This measure is constrained by, e.g., Gleason's Theorem or envariance to be the usual Hilbert measure. However, this ab initio measure ultimately governs the allocation of a self or a consciousness to a particular branch of the wavefunction, and hence invokes primitives which lie beyond the Everett wavefunction and beyond what we usually think of as physics. The significance of this leap has been largely overlooked, but requires serious scrutiny.