David Deutsch on Physics Without Probability
Simon Benjamin2 HN recommenders · 2020–2023
38K views · talk · evergreen · Uploaded 2015-06-04
A 2015 talk by David Deutsch with slides and audio about constructor theory and how physics, in particular the many-worlds interpretation, can be framed without probability.
Cited in threads on probability and quantum theory as a strong argument that probabilities can be eliminated from physics.
1:03:43The Quantum Conspiracy: What Popularizers of QM Don't Want You to Know
Google TechTalks
9:16Quantum Entanglement & Spooky Action at a Distance
Veritasium
22:49I bought 1000 meters of wire to settle a physics debate
AlphaPhoenix
12:46The Speed of Light is NOT About Light
PBS Space Time
19:05Why No One Has Measured The Speed Of Light
Veritasium
56:04Richard Feynman - The.Character of Physical Law - Part 1 The Law of Gravitation (full version)
Tinkerin' Thinkers
1:06:50HD Feynman: FUN TO IMAGINE complete (with optional Chinese subtitles)
Christopher Sykes
11:33A new way to visualize General Relativity
ScienceClic English
3 comments from Hacker News
IMHO, a better title would be " Probabilistic Theories Of Everything" Contrast with the recent work from David Deutsch, which eliminates all probabilities from physics. Intro to Constructor Theory: [VIDEO]
Any theory that is explainable and hard to vary does not need probability. Can you explain how probability is used in statistical mechanics in a way to contradict what I am saying? P.S. Thanks for being a sport and talk about this in a truly respectful way. If you want to understand where I am coming from, I can really recommend David Deutsch talk about probability here [VIDEO] It was a big awakening for me once I realized not only where probability theory came from (not physics) and how engrained it is in our thinking.
David Deutsch’s “Physics Without Probability” covers the history of probability, it’s legitimate and misconceived uses and concludes that according to MWI there is no such thing in reality - it’s basically that probabilities correspond to how measures of the multiverse proportion themselves as differentiation occurs. I watched it a few years ago so may be misremembering bits but I think that is the gist… Worth a watch especially if you balk at this idea just to to see a strong counter argument. [VIDEO] Edit: link