Analysis of Wallace's Proof of the Born Rule in Everettian Quantum Mechanics II: Concepts and Axioms

TL;DR

This paper critically examines Wallace's proof of the Born rule in Everettian Quantum Mechanics, highlighting issues with the underlying axioms and concepts, and questioning its rational justification.

Contribution

It provides a detailed critique of the axioms and concepts in Wallace's proof, arguing they are insufficiently justified and often contradictory.

Findings

Most axioms lack proper justification

Ambiguities undermine the axioms' validity

Axioms are not rational mandates in Everettian QM

Abstract

Having analyzed the formal aspects of Wallace's proof of the Born rule, we now discuss the concepts and axioms upon which it is built. Justification for most axioms is shown to be problematic, and at times contradictory. Some of the problems are caused by ambiguities in the concepts used. We conclude the axioms are not reasonable enough to be taken as mandates of rationality in Everettian Quantum Mechanics. This invalidates the interpretation of Wallace's result as meaning it would be rational for Everettian agents to decide using the Born rule.