Is the decoherence in consistent histories different from environmental decoherence? I’m not sure if I’m reading the interpretation wrong but it seems like decoherence in ch is purely mathematical instead of a physical interaction

nickv2423 said:

Is the decoherence in consistent histories different from environmental decoherence? I’m not sure if I’m reading the interpretation wrong but it seems like decoherence in ch is purely mathematical instead of a physical interaction

The consistent histories formalism lets us calculate interference terms between histories. A set of histories is decoherent when these terms are all suppressed. As such it is analogous to ordinary decoherence. It's mathematical in the sense that different sets of alternative histories for the same system will have different levels of decoherence, just as different splittings of subsystem + environment will have different levels of ordinary decoherence. But I would not say this makes it purely mathematical as some sets of alternative histories, like some system + environments splits, are physically very natural.

Morbert said:

The consistent histories formalism lets us calculate interference terms between histories. A set of histories is decoherent when these terms are all suppressed. As such it is analogous to ordinary decoherence. It's mathematical in the sense that different sets of alternative histories for the same system will have different levels of decoherence, just as different splittings of subsystem + environment will have different levels of ordinary decoherence. But I would not say this makes it purely mathematical as some sets of alternative histories, like some system + environments splits, are physically very natural.

So in the double slit experiment, it’s the physical interaction between the electron and the measuring device that causes it to decohere and lose the interference pattern according to ch?