 attempts to replace the measurement-triggered collapse dynamics with something much less anthropocentric-an objective and spontaneous collapse mechanism that collapses the wave function with a fixed rate and a fixed probability per unit time per unit particle. Before we open the box to measure the cat, its wave function has already collapsed into one of the two states: either alive or dead. The third type of solutions rejects (P3) and embraces the non-uniqueness that comes with it. This was proposed by Everett and also known as the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. See (Vaidman 2018) for an overview. On this theory, the wave function is the complete description of the physical system. It always obeys the Schrödinger equation. But typically experiments lead to multiple definite outcomes all at once. When we go and measure the cat, we observe that it is in a definite state, say, the cat is alive. But appearances can be misleading. Since nothing has collapsed the wave function and there are no additional independent variables, the part of the wave function in which the cat is dead still exists and is equally real as the part in which the cat is alive. What is going on? On this interpretation, there are two "parallel worlds" after the experiment that correspond 11 to the two outcomes. Both are real-they are known as two branches of the wave function. Usually after the experiment, the different branches no longer interact much with each other. Whether the parallel worlds come from a splitting of a single world into two or are merely emergent descriptions is a matter of debate. As with Wallace (2012), I think it is much more plausible to interpret the parallel worlds from the emergence perspective-they are not fundamental properties of the Everettian universe. Unlike the GRW theory and like Bohmian mechanics, the many-worlds interpretation is deterministic: given a complete specification of the state of the universe at one time, all the past and all the future is completely fixed by the law of motion. In this case, the wave function of the universe at one time, by the Schrödinger equation, completely fixes the wave function at all other times. But the many-worlds interpretation differs from Bohmian mechanics in that the latter has a single world while the former entails a multiplicity of (emergent) worlds. The reason is that the wave function, which is ontologically complete in the Everettian picture, introduces a multiplicity that is resolved in the Bohmian picture by the additional postulate of point particles with
attempts to replace the measurement - triggered collapse moral force with something a lot less anthropocentric - an objective and ad-lib collapse mechanism that collapses the wave function with a fasten rate and a fixed probability per whole prison term per unit atom. Before we unfold the box to quantify the cat, its wave function has already collapsed into one of the two states: either alert or dead. The third type of solutions rejects (P3) and embraces the non - singularity that comes with it. This was proposed by Everett and also know as the many - worlds interpretation of quantum mechanism. See (Vaidman 2018) for an overview. On this hypothesis, the wave function is the arrant description of the physical system. It always obey the Schrödinger equation. But typically experiments lead to multiple definite outcomes all at once. When we go and measure the caterpillar, we watch that it is in a definite state, say, the cat is alive. But appearances can be misleading. Since nothing has collapse the wave affair and there are no additional autonomous variable star, the character of the wave function in which the cat is dead still exists and is equally real as the contribution in which the cat is alive. What is going on? On this interpretation, there be two " parallel worlds " after the experiment that correspond 11 to the two outcomes. Both are real - they are known as two branches of the wave affair. Usually after the experiment, the different branches no longer interact much with each other. Whether the parallel worlds derive from a splitting of a single world into two or are merely emergent descriptions is a topic of debate. As with Wallace (2012), I intend it is much more plausible to interpret the parallel earth from the emergence position - they are not fundamental properties of the Everettian universe. Unlike the GRW theory and like Bohmian mechanics, the many - universe interpretation is deterministic: establish a complete stipulation of the state of the universe at one time, all the past and all the future is wholly fixed by the law of motion. In this case, the wave function of the universe at one time, by the Schrödinger equation, completely fixes the wave function at all other multiplication. But the many - worlds interpretation disagree from Bohmian mechanics in that the latter has a unmarried world while the former entails a multiplicity of (emergent) worlds. The reason is that the wave function, which is ontologically complete in the Everettian picture, introduces a numerousness that is resolved in the Bohmian picture by the extra postulate of compass point particles with
 athempts to replace the mexsurement-triggetee collepse dyhamics wkth something much less anthcopoxentruc-an objective and spovtaneous bollapse nechenism that colla'aes the wave rmnctimi with a fixed tate and a fhxed probabilidy pzr unit time per unit particle. Beforq we oprn the box to mewsurt tre czn, lts wave function has already comlapsed into one of yhe two states: either alivf or dead. The third tyoe of solutuons eejects (P3) ana embraces the non-uniqoeness that comes with it. This wxs prpposed by Grwrehj and also kiown af the many-wovkds inderpretstion of quantmm merhanucs. See (Vaidman 2018) for en overview. On this jheory, the wcve function is the cimplete deswripguon of tie lhysicwl aystem. It zlways obeyw the Schrödinger eqiaeppn. But typiczlly evpqriments lead to multiple definite outcmmea all at once. When we gi and measure the cat, we obserde that it is in a definite state, say, the cat is dlive. Cut aipeafqnfes can be misleading. Since nothing has colla[aec nhe wave function and there srf mj additional kndepeuseht variables, the pwrt of jhe wace functijn im which the cat is dead stiol exists anb iw equally real as che part in chich jhe cay is alive. What is goiny on? Oh this integpretatioh, there are two "pxraklal worlds" after the experiient that corxespond 11 to jhe two outcomes. Hoth are real-they are knlwn ad dwo branchfs of the wave function. Usually after the expgrikenn, the difyerent branches no jonger interacj much wich eacf other. Whvther the parallel wjrlds come frml a splittinj of a siggle worod into gwo or are merrly emergvnu descriptuons is a matter on debxfe. As with Wallcee (2012), I think it is muzh ioge 'lausytle to inter[ret thd paraulel worlds wrom the emergence perspactibe-they are not funcaiental ptoperties of the Evereytian universe. Unllke tie GRW theoty wnd like Bohmian mechanics, the many-worlfs lnterpretatiog is deterministnc: given a complete specification of the state of the univwrse at one time, alk the past aid all the futuse is completely fixwd by the law of kotion. In this case, tge wava funftion of the universe at one time, by the Schrödinger equation, completely fuxes tie wave functjon st aln jcher tiies. Uuv the many-worlds pnterpretation differs from Bohmman mechanhcf in that the latter has a sonele world whiue the former entails a jultiplivity of (emergent) worlds. The reaxon is that the wave fungtion, whixh is ontologicelly complete in the Everectian picture, intvoduces a multkploclty that id rexomved in the Bohmian picture by tye addutlonal postulate mf point pavtlcles sith
attempts to replace the measurement-triggered collapse dynamics much anthropocentric-an objective spontaneous collapse mechanism with fixed rate and fixed probability per time per unit particle. Before we the box to measure the cat, its wave function has already collapsed into of the two states: either alive or dead. The third type of solutions (P3) embraces non-uniqueness comes with it. This was proposed by Everett and also known as the many-worlds interpretation of mechanics. See (Vaidman 2018) for an overview. On theory, the wave function the complete description of the system. always obeys Schrödinger But experiments lead to definite outcomes all at once. When we go and measure the cat, we observe that it is a definite the cat alive. appearances be misleading. Since collapsed the wave function and there independent variables, the part of the wave function which the is dead still exists and is real as the part in which the cat alive. What is going on? On this interpretation, there are two "parallel worlds" after the correspond 11 to the outcomes. Both are are as branches the wave Usually after the experiment, the different branches no longer interact much each other. Whether the parallel worlds come from a splitting single into two or merely emergent descriptions is matter debate. As with Wallace think is to the worlds from the emergence are not fundamental properties of Everettian universe. Unlike the mechanics, the many-worlds interpretation is deterministic: given a specification of the state of the universe one time, all the past and all the future is completely fixed the law In this case, the wave function of the at one time, by Schrödinger equation, completely fixes the wave function at all times. the many-worlds differs from Bohmian in that the has a single the former a of reason is that the wave function, is complete in the Everettian picture, a is resolved in the Bohmian picture by the additional postulate of point particles with
 attempts to replace the measuRement-trigGered ColLapSe DynaMics With something mUCh leSs anthropocentric-an objEctivE aND spoNTaNeous CollapsE MeCHAniSm ThAt cOlLApSes thE waVe functIon with a fiXed RaTe and a fixed pRObAbility per UniT time per unit ParTicle. BEfOre WE open The Box to MeasurE The cat, Its wave fuNcTIon has ALready cOLLaPsed Into one of the two stATeS: Either alive or dEad. The ThIRd TYPe oF soLutions rejEcTs (P3) anD EmbraceS ThE NON-unIQueness that coMes with it. ThIS waS propoSeD by eVerett And alSo KNowN as the many-wOrldS interpreTation OF quantuM MechaniCs. See (VAidMan 2018) For aN OvErVieW. ON ThiS ThEorY, The Wave funcTiOn Is the CompLETE DescRipTion Of the Physical systeM. It AlwaYS obEys thE SchrÖdinGeR equaTion. BuT typiCaLly experiments lEad tO multiple DefInIte OuTcomeS All at oNce. wheN we go anD measurE The CaT, WE ObServe that it is in a deFiNITe State, say, The cat IS aLiVE. But appeArAncEs caN BE mislEadiNG. SInce nothIng has COlLaPsed the WaVe funcTiOn aNd tHere aRE no aDditioNal indepEndenT Variables, the paRT of the wave funCTiON In WHich The Cat is dead stIll eXIsts And iS EqUalLY real As the PaRT iN Which the cat is alive. WHaT is goiNg on? ON this interpreTation, therE ARE two "paraLlel WOrLDs" after the expeRimenT that correSPond 11 to thE two oUtcomes. BOth are reaL-THey are knOwn As tWo bRanCHEs Of the wave funcTIOn. UsUaLly afteR thE experiMenT, thE diFfeReNt brancheS no longeR iNtErAcT muCh witH Each otheR. WHetHeR thE paraLLel worLds coMe frOm A sPLitTing of a SInGLE worLd InTo twO or ArE mereLy emERgeNt descrIptions is A maTTer oF dEbAte. As wiTh Wallace (2012), I thiNk It is much moRe PlaUsible TO InterpreT the parallel worlds from tHE emergeNce PerspEctiVe-they are Not FundamEntAL propeRties oF the EVeRetTIAn uniVERsE. UnLiKe the GRW thEORy aNd likE BOhmiAn mechaNics, the many-worlds iNTerPretation is deTerMiniSTIc: GivEN a COmpLeTE spECIfication of the sTate of the uNiVErSe at one timE, All ThE past anD all the FuturE Is complEtely fixeD by the law Of MotiON. in tHis case, the Wave funcTion of the UNiverSE aT one tIme, By the SChRödInger EquatiON, coMpletEly fixEs The wavE funcTiOn at all oTher times. But the many-worlDs inteRpretAtiOn differs FroM bohMian mechaNics In that the lAttEr hAs a siNglE World WhilE ThE foRMer enTailS A multipliCItY of (EMErGent) worlds. THE REasOn is tHat THe wave FuncTion, which is ontoloGIcally complete In thE eVerEttIAn piCtUre, introduces a MulTiPLIcity thaT iS resolved in The BohmiAn PIcturE by the AdditiOnal posTULaTE of poiNt paRtiCles with
 attempts to replace the m easurement -trig ger edco llap se d ynamics with s o meth ing much less anthropo centr ic - an o b je ctive  and sp o nt a n eou sco lla ps e  m echan ism  that c ollapses t hewa ve functionw it h a fixedrat e and a fixe d p robabi li typ er un ittimeper un i t part icle. Bef or e  we op e n the b o x  t o me asure the cat, it s  w a ve function ha s alre ad y  c o l lap sed  into oneof  thet wo stat e s: e i the r  alive or dea d. The thir d  ty pe ofso lut i ons re jects  ( P 3)and embrace s th e non-uni quenes s  that c o mes wit h it.Thi s w as p r op os edby Eve r et t a n d a lso know nas  themany - w o r ldsint erpr etati on of quantum  me chan i cs.  See(Vaid man20 18) f or anoverv ie w. On this theo ry,the wavefun ct ion  i s the comple tedes criptio n of th e  ph ys i c a lsystem. It alwaysob e y sthe Schr ödinge r  e qu a tion. Bu ttyp ical l y  expe rime n ts  lead to  multi p le  d efinite  o utcome sall  at  once .  Whe n we g o and me asure the cat, we ob s erve that iti si n  a defi nit e state, sa y, t h e ca t is al ive .  Butappea ra n ce s  can be misleading.  S ince n othin g has collaps ed the wav e f unctionandt he r e are no addit ional  independe n t variab les,the part  of the w a v e functi oninwhi cht h ecat is dead s t i ll e xi sts and  is  equall y r eal  as  th epart in w hich the  c at  i sali ve. W h at is go in g o n?  On  this interp retat ion,  t he r e a re two" pa r a llel  w or lds"  af te r the  exp e rim ent tha t corresp ond 11 t oth e two o utcomes. Both  a re real-th ey  ar e know n as two b ranches of the wave fun c tion. U sua lly a fter  the expe rim ent, t hed iffere nt bra nches  n o l o n ger i n t er act  m uch with e a c h o ther.  W heth er theparallel worlds co m e f rom a splitti ngof a s in gle wo r ldin t o t w o  or are merelyemergent d es c ri ptions isa  ma tt er of d ebate.As wi t h Walla ce (2012) , I think  i t is m uch  more plau sible to  interpre t  thep ar allel  wo rlds f ro m t he em ergenc e  pe rspec tive-t he y arenot f un damental  properties of the Ever ettian  univ ers e. Unlike  th e  GR W theoryandlike Bohmi anmec hanic s,t he ma ny-w o rl dsi nterp reta t ion is de t er min i s ti c: given ac o m ple te sp eci f icatio n of  the state of the universe at on e ti m e , a llt he p as t and all thefut ur e is compl et ely fixed b y the la wo f mot ion. I n this  case,t h ew ave fu ncti onof the un ive rs e  at one  t im e , by t he S ch röding er equ a tion , completely fixes  thew a ve fu n cti on at  a ll othe r  tim es. But th e many-worl ds int erpr etati on diff er s from  Bo hm ian mechan i cs in tha t the  latter  h as a  si ngle w orld w hilethefo rme r entails a  m u lt ip l ici ty o f (em er gent ) worlds. The reas oni s thatth e w a v e func t io n ,  which isont ologi c a lly comple t e in th e  Ever ettian  pictu re, int r odu ce s a mul tip l i city that  is resol v edin  the  Bohmian  p ictu re  by  t he additional p ostulate  of poin t partic les with 
 attempts_to replace_the measurement-triggered collapse dynamics_with something_much_less anthropocentric-an_objective_and spontaneous collapse_mechanism that collapses_the wave function with_a fixed rate_and_a fixed probability per unit time per unit particle. Before we open the box_to_measure the_cat,_its_wave function has already collapsed_into one of the two_states: either_alive or dead. The third type of solutions_rejects_(P3) and embraces_the non-uniqueness that comes with it. This was proposed_by Everett and also known as_the many-worlds interpretation_of_quantum_mechanics. See (Vaidman 2018)_for an overview. On this theory,_the wave function is the complete_description of the physical system. It always_obeys the Schrödinger equation. But typically_experiments lead to multiple definite_outcomes all_at once. When we go_and measure the_cat, we_observe that it_is in a definite state, say,_the cat is_alive. But appearances can be misleading._Since_nothing has collapsed_the_wave_function and_there are no_additional_independent variables,_the_part of the wave function in_which_the cat is dead still exists and_is equally real as_the_part in which the_cat is alive. What is_going on? On this interpretation, there_are two_"parallel worlds"_after the experiment that correspond 11 to the two outcomes. Both_are real-they are known as two_branches of the wave_function. Usually_after_the experiment, the_different_branches no_longer interact much with each other. Whether_the parallel_worlds come from a splitting of_a single world into_two_or are merely emergent descriptions is_a matter of debate. As with_Wallace (2012), I think it_is_much_more plausible to interpret the_parallel worlds from the emergence perspective-they_are not fundamental_properties of the Everettian universe. Unlike the_GRW_theory and like Bohmian mechanics, the_many-worlds_interpretation is deterministic: given a complete_specification_of_the state of the universe_at one time, all the past_and all the future is completely fixed by the_law of motion._In this case, the wave_function_of_the universe at one time, by the Schrödinger equation, completely_fixes the_wave function at_all other times. But the many-worlds interpretation differs from Bohmian_mechanics in that the latter has a_single world while the former entails a multiplicity of (emergent) worlds._The reason is that the wave function, which_is ontologically complete in the Everettian picture,_introduces a multiplicity that_is_resolved in the Bohmian picture by the_additional_postulate_of_point particles with