David Wallace

speaker

1,940 appearances 2 recordings 1 series first heard May 2025 last heard 20 Jul

David Wallace’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.

Trend

recordings per month · last 12 months

Recordings per month over the last 12 months — 1 in all, peaking in Jul 2026 with 1.

Appearances

newest first · ▶ plays the moment

Theories of Everything with Curt Jaimungal · Emily Adlam & David Wallace: The Quantum Interpretation That Divides Physicists · 20 Jul 2026 podcast

I mean, good for them.

I see.

But I mean, it's not obvious that the, I mean, I appreciate this is your own argument, but it's not obvious the idealization is any more unreasonable here in the Everett case.

I mean, a Dutch book deterministically causes you to lose money.

It's not just like with probability.

Yeah.

the real world requires some idealization yeah of course it does but that's true for dutch books in the non-everettian case as well um uh you can certainly i don't think it would be difficult to get a dutch book at the level that such that if you if you assume no intervention from outside you can get the probabilities down to the point to which we're talking about fluctuations or something rather than just like low weight ordinary probabilities

Okay.

I mean, dialectically, I think that objection lives earlier or should live earlier.

I mean, there's an established set of arguments that people like Tebow and Dave Baker have used that's basically saying, look, the entire appeal to decoherence as a way of understanding branching structure presupposes that we can use the mod squared amplitude metric as a metric of approximation.

Yeah.

um and that assumption it's claimed uh relies on the probability interpretation and so there's circularity i mean uh that's i think an interesting objection i don't think it ultimately succeeds but the reasons are subtle and fairly contestable um i sort of think by the time if you if you've already got to the level at which you've got a branching structure you're discussing um decision strategy you must have solved that problem anyway um

So it's odd.

I'm not sure that the problem could recur at that level.

I mean, that's probably just to say if somebody had that constander concern, they should probably just move their objection back to the branching structure in the first place.

Can I ask why you're not a cubist?

I don't think it succeeds in being a coherent explanation of quantum mechanics.

I think it's an interesting exploration of how to think about various stylized quantum systems in the context of quantum information.

lacks the resources at present and doesn't have an obvious route to get them to describe most of the actual applications that we make of quantum mechanics.

So if I want to understand the EPR experiment or Bell inequality violation locality, maybe you're prepared to accept that cubism does that.

Showing 281–300 of 1,940 · page 15 of 97