Talk:Hugh Everett III

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: The intro strikes me as problematic... We're using an unpublished book? That violates at least 2 guidelines: WP:V and WP:SNOW, and likely others. Also, even if we accept that Everett died in penury, that doesn't seem to contradict the idea that he made millions off his math acumen. It's perfectly possible to become a multimillionaire and die poor (eg. the man who broke the bank at Monte Carlo). --129.49.7.125 (talk) 18:57, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: About to be published, I believe.  But I agree with your point, that he might have made million(s) and then lost it.--Michael C. Price talk 00:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wealth 

message: the description of his education is unclear. it describes him defending his dissertation, but never mentions princeton conferring the doctorate. this is compounded by the image of the (later) cerificate, on which he is listed as 'mr.' hugh everett. did he get the ph.d.? Toyokuni3 (talk) 17:03, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: sorry, i see it now in the second paragraph. perhaps that should be moved to where it fits chronologically?Toyokuni3 (talk) 17:06, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's difficult to decide what's best -- Everett switched back and forth for a few years between academia and the military.  The article tries to talk about these two activities separately; perhaps it should just describe everything chronologically. --Michael C. Price talk 19:39, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Education

message: It seems irrelevant and irreverent to mention that Everett believed in quantum immortality in the same sentence as his death. There is no evidence that he believed that he would live forever in this universe, just in at least one, so it is a belief related to his physics theories, not relevant to his death "in this universe". Lucifer-oxy (talk) 03:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No irreverence intended by association.  It just seemed a natural segue.--Michael C. Price talk 10:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quantum Immortality 

message: “Everett's obesity, constant chain-smoking and heavy drinking almost certainly contributed to [his untimely death].” — from the current article. This is lacking citations; I googled up his photographs, and found not a single one were he would look obese. I am adding a citation request; please feel free to remove if unappropriate. — Fregimus (talk) 11:27, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a look at Everett on wikiquotes, his son describes him as such.  (I agree the photos don't really make him look so bad.) --Michael C. Price talk 19:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Michael, for locating the citation. Fregimus (talk) 00:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obesity, chain-smoking and drinking 

message: It's not the common multiverse.
Everettverse = many-worlds interpretation  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4117:34E9:401A:226F:47D1:50B8 (talk) 22:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''create page or paragraph in the many worlds article'': [[Everettverse]]: multiverse of alternative wavefunctional evolutions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Hugh Everett III. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724151508/http://or.journal.informs.org/cgi/reprint/11/3/399 to http://or.journal.informs.org/cgi/reprint/11/3/399
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120326192406/http://www.controversia.fis.ufba.br/index_arquivos/Freire-Bohm-HSPS.pdf to http://www.controversia.fis.ufba.br/index_arquivos/Freire-Bohm-HSPS.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724151508/http://or.journal.informs.org/cgi/reprint/11/3/399 to http://or.journal.informs.org/cgi/reprint/11/3/399
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:16, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Hugh Everett III. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081218094638/http://www.ppgefhc.ufba.br/dissertacoes/freitas2004.pdf to http://www.ppgefhc.ufba.br/dissertacoes/freitas2004.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080214084339/http://www.bandweblogs.com/blog/2007/11/16/parallel-worlds-parallel-lives-bbc-four-documentary-about-eels-founder-mark-everett-and-his-father/ to http://www.bandweblogs.com/blog/2007/11/16/parallel-worlds-parallel-lives-bbc-four-documentary-about-eels-founder-mark-everett-and-his-father/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110715161722/http://www.readmetro.com/show/en/Boston/20081021/1/26/ to http://www.readmetro.com/show/en/Boston/20081021/1/26/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:03, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The latest changes make it sound a like MWI and RSI are different interpretations.  They are not.  MWI is merely a popularised version of RSI.  Content the same.  And RSI was Wheeler's imposed moniker, not Everett's choice.   cheers, Michael C. Price talk 19:02, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a reference for your claim? Johnjbarton (talk) 22:28, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Which claim?  DeWitt's MWI was merely a name change, as anyone who understands QM can easily verify, and "Correlation interpretation" is in the document archives .  cheers, Michael C. Price talk 07:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Your claim that RSI and MWI are the same. Wikipedia standard is not "as anyone who understands QM can easily verify", see WP:VERIFY. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:27, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RSI/MWI are the same 

message: I reapplied this reverted change: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hugh_Everett_III&oldid=prev&diff=1176001365
I added a reference as well.
The edit summary on the revert was "Revert. Need to talk all these change out. MWI's is not Dewitt's interpretation as opposed to Everett's. A false dichotomy."  However the change was unrelated to MWI or Dewitt and no Talk topic was raised.
The change concerns the model that Everett's work was set in opposition to. Everett's publication and his thesis point to von Neumann's model. It was von neumann's model that formalized the collapse postulate. Collapse is not even part of Copenhagen and Bohr never talks about it. See for example https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/ It was an idea the Heisenberg proposed and von Neumann is the best "interpretation" level thing to reference. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed this philosophical debate from the lead.  It probably should go in the Copenhagen / von Neumann articles.  cheers, Michael C. Price talk 07:56, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Compared to the current version, it was clearer in Johnjbarton's version what the controversy that led Everett to leave academia was. However, I agree that the term Von Neumann–Wigner interpretation is probably too technical for the lede, and it should be expressed in some other way. But unfortunately I have no suggestion which word to use, if Copenhagen is not correct. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 08:32, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The statements about leaving academia are the same in both versions.. aren't they?  cheers, Michael C. Price talk 08:57, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but the preceding paragraph which sets context is not. The words "In contrast" already imply some controversy, although it might be made even more explicit for the benefit of the reader, e.g. by mentioning that the reception was not very positive. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 09:06, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Everett left academia before his thesis publication, so any discontent must be due to negative feed back during his thesis construction.  Probably he found Wheeler a very difficult supervisor, to judge from the Heresy paper.  cheers, Michael C. Price talk 11:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why did you restore this text? The plural implies that it was not only Wheeler. Besides, that part had been corrected earlier  to comply with the source. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 12:44, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that text was supported by a reference to Byrne, so I restored it.  cheers, Michael C. Price talk 13:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

text: "Everett left academia before his thesis publication, so any discontent must be due to negative feed back during his thesis construction." This claim is original research, not backup by sources. The sources say he was concerned about his draft deferment and took the Pentagon research job in response. ref "Heresy" pg 112 "We know from a letter of Wheeler’s that, for administrative reasons related to military service, Everett wished to remain registered at Princeton University at least until 1956.194 In the course of 1956, as we have seen, he moved to the Pentagon, where he was no longer in danger of being drafted, but probably had little time to devote to the thesis.195". The review cites two primary sources. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

text: Along the same lines I removed collapse and quantum superposition in the lede in favor of a short quote from Everett that 1) mentions the most critical aspect of this thesis, the pure wave equation and 2) mentions the observers to give the flavor of impact of the universal wavefunction idea. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correctly describing the theory Everett's model opposes.