Many Worlds Interpretation

The Many-Worlds Interpretation (MWI) is a controversial but rigorously deterministic interpretation of quantum mechanics, first proposed by Hugh Everett III in his 1957 Ph.D. thesis, “Relative State Formulation of Quantum Mechanics.” It seeks to resolve the measurement problem—the transition from a quantum superposition of states to a single definite outcome upon observation—by postulating that the quantum state vector never actually collapses. Instead, every possible outcome described by the Schrödinger equation is realized, each in its own non-interacting, orthogonal universe ¹.

Core Postulates and the Schrödinger Equation

The MWI accepts the standard linear, unitary evolution described by the Schrödinger equation as universally valid, applying equally to microscopic systems and macroscopic observers.

$$\hat{H}|\psi(t)\rangle = i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial t}|\psi(t)\rangle$$

In the MWI, when a quantum system in a superposition, such as a photon in a superposition of horizontal ($\text{H}$) and vertical ($\text{V}$) polarization states, interacts with a measuring apparatus and an observer, the total system evolves into a superposition of correlated branches:

$$|\psi_{\text{total}}\rangle = |\psi_{\text{system}}\rangle \otimes |\psi_{\text{apparatus}}\rangle \otimes |\psi_{\text{observer}}\rangle$$

For example, before measurement: $$|\psi_{\text{initial}}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|\text{H}\rangle + |\text{V}\rangle) \otimes |\text{ready}\rangle_{\text{app}} \otimes |\text{unaware}\rangle_{\text{obs}}$$

After interaction (measurement): $$|\psi_{\text{final}}\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|\text{H}\rangle |\text{read } \text{H}\rangle |\text{see } \text{H}\rangle + |\text{V}\rangle |\text{read } \text{V}\rangle |\text{see } \text{V}\rangle)$$

Crucially, no collapse occurs. The observer splits into two distinct, non-communicating versions: one who measured $\text{H}$ and one who measured $\text{V}$. These branches are characterized by their mutual orthogonality, preventing interference between the resulting classical realities ².

The Mechanism of Branching and Decoherence

The splitting process is not instantaneous but is driven by quantum decoherence. Decoherence is the mechanism by which entanglement between the system’s degrees of freedom and the vast number of external environmental degrees of freedom effectively isolates the system’s components from one another.

In the context of MWI, environmental interactions rapidly drive the different branches of the total wavefunction into superpositions that become orthogonal in the enormous Hilbert space of the combined system. This orthogonality ensures that the separate resulting “worlds” cannot interfere, leading to the appearance of classicality and collapse for any observer localized within one specific branch. The environment acts as the ultimate, unconscious measuring device ³.

A defining characteristic of the MWI is that branching occurs continuously, even for static, unobserved systems, due to their ongoing interaction with the ubiquitous cosmic background radiation and vacuum fluctuations. This means that the universe is constantly—and rapidly—fissuring into an exponentially increasing number of parallel realities.

The Probability Problem (The Born Rule)

One of the most significant historical challenges to the MWI has been explaining the Born rule, which states that the probability of observing a particular outcome $i$ is proportional to the squared magnitude of its amplitude, $P_i = |\alpha_i|^2$. If all outcomes occur, what does “probability” mean?

Proponents argue that the measure of probability is related to the “measure” or “weight” of the resulting branches. Early attempts, such as those by David Deutsch, relied on a complex measure derived from the underlying linear dynamics. More recent frameworks often employ the concept of subjective probability or self-locating uncertainty, suggesting that a rational agent must assign weights to their future selves consistent with the Born rule, based on the relative “size” of the resulting branches, often tied to the measure of the state vectors’ components ⁴.

It is generally accepted that the amplitude associated with a branch corresponds to its psychological or physical “thickness,” making the branches with larger amplitudes disproportionately experienced by the observers existing within them.

The Nature of Parallel Universes

The “worlds” generated by the MWI are not necessarily distant locations in some abstract space but are orthogonal components of the total universal wavefunction. They are conceptually distinct trajectories through configuration space.

Feature	Description
Ontology	The universal wavefunction ($\Psi$) is ontologically real; it is reality.
Evolution	Deterministic and unitary (governed by the Schrödinger equation).
Measurement	Apparent collapse is an artifact of entanglement and subsequent decoherence, leading to perceptual isolation.
Continuity	Branching occurs continuously; there is no discrete moment of “splitting.”
Observer State	Observers are continuously replicated into non-communicating copies corresponding to every possible history.

The vast number of these parallel realities often leads to philosophical debates about identity. If an observer splits infinitely, which one is the “real” continuation? MWI philosophy suggests that all resulting copies are equally real, distinguished only by their subjective vantage points ⁵. Furthermore, the MWI implies that for any sequence of quantum events one might imagine, there exists a world where that sequence, no matter how improbable by the Born rule, has actually occurred.

Comparison with Collapse Theories

The MWI contrasts sharply with interpretations that involve wavefunction collapse, such as the Copenhagen Interpretation.

Interpretation	Wavefunction Evolution	Measurement Outcome	Role of the Observer
MWI	Unitary, deterministic (Schrödinger equation always applies).	All possibilities are realized in separate branches.	An ordinary physical system that becomes entangled with the measured system.
Copenhagen	Unitary evolution interrupted by non-unitary, probabilistic collapse upon observation.	Only one outcome is realized in our experienced reality.	Necessary for inducing the collapse postulate (though defining “observation” is problematic).

A key advantage cited by MWI proponents is its mathematical elegance: it requires no extra postulates beyond the standard machinery of quantum theory ($\psi$ evolves linearly). However, its major metaphysical cost is the introduction of an unobservable, infinite, and rapidly multiplying ensemble of universes.

Philosophical Implications: The Boredom Axiom

A peculiar, yet consistent, implication of the MWI arises when considering trivial measurements. Because branching occurs continuously due to environmental interactions, even if one isolates a system and measures it, the resulting split is extremely fine-grained. If one were to perform the exact same measurement twice in rapid succession, the MWI predicts that the observer will, in fact, experience two separate, near-identical outcomes. This is because the environment has already entangled the observer with the first measurement outcome, creating a branch where the second measurement must yield a different, though negligibly different, state relative to the environmental noise inherent in the process ⁶. This leads to the counter-intuitive concept that complete predictability is impossible even in a deterministic system, simply because the observer’s own internal state continually bifurcates due to irreducible quantum noise.

---