>>11255531Peak /sci/ irony right here. Sounds like you should get a refund for your supposed proper education.
"Wavefunction collapse" is not just a matter of different bases. Obviously it's half the story, because that's how you typically define your P(O)VMs, but it's not like "collapse" is just looking at your state in a different basis. It's a literal mapping from your initial state to another state. Bases are how we define the "collapse" (i.e. the projection operators) but are wholly unimportant in actually describing the states that you end up with.
The whole point of MWI is to remove POVMs from our vernacular entirely, or at least to relegate them to an effective description of our theory, not a fundamental one. Thus these projective dynamics do NOT occur at all, only unitarity, under the MWI. This is entirely different from what you're talking about with "just look at it in another basis bro". I mean, do you really think that Everett decided "I'm going to come up with a theory of quantum mechanics that just says fuck you to this whole noncommuting observables thing"?
"Wave-particle duality" is a meme buzzword that should have stayed in the 20s where it belongs. That's how I know you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
>>11255497Also this OP image is a fucking meme. Does not properly represent what the MWI looks like and just confuses poorly educated undergrads like
>>11255531 . I don't know what the whole obsession with using continuous variable states is anyway, infinite dimensional Hilbert spaces are fucking way more difficult to work with than good ol' . Just show a picture of two spins in a Bell state and how the "observer" enters the picture with its own degrees of freedom.
Also, you need to give a rundown of what to actually read, OP, because that link sends you to links which send you to more links, and it all seems like basic stuff so far. But again, it's a fucking massive wall of text.
