Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
Everett's Quantum Mechanics
Red Herrings

Consistent histories approach resolves nothing beyond ordinary QM
grqc/9604012 (A. Kent)
quantph/9608007 (J. Finkelstein)

What is achieved by decoherence? (H. D. Zeh)
 New Developments on Fundamental Problems in Quantum
Physice (Oviedo II), M. Ferrero and A. van der Merwe, edts.,
(Kluwer Academic, 1997)
quantph/9610014 (H. D. Zeh)
Comment:
Dr. H. Dieter Zeh claims that there is some confusion on how the concept
of ``decoherence'' has to be defined. However, his claim in the article
cannot be justified. Eq.(4) in his article is nothing but the direct
consequence of the linearity of the time evolution operator, and how to
call the entangled state is a matter of taste. People like to call it
just ``entangled''. The term ``decoherence'' refers to the situation that
the offdiagonal matrix elements of the reduced density matrix vanish
through the process of interaction with the environment (which has
nothing to do with the quantum measurement problem). Nobody is confused
on how the concept of decoherence HAS TO BE DEFINED, unless he introduces
the vague REDEFINITION to it. The concept he argues in his article is not
decoherence, but is the ``relative state'', which Everett introduced
in 1957. His redefinition of decoherence is very misleading.
Nothing can be achieved by simply replacing the ``relative state'' with
the word ``dechoherence''.
 T.Sakaguchi
Serious Misconceptions

B. S. DeWitt and N. Graham,
"The ManyWorlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics",
Princeton Univ. Press, 1973

David Deutsch in
"The ghost in the atom (Paul C.W. Davies and J.R. Brown, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1986)",
pp83105
© 19962017 Toshifumi Sakaguchi