>>16951276
Your iPhone camera sees quantum noise. Many Worlds turns that noise into decisions. Each coin flip or throw of the dice is unique to your branch in the multiverse.
Many Worlds generates quantum random numbers using your iPhone camera.
Your camera sensor is a grid of millions of tiny light detectors. At quantum scales, light shows up as individual photons, and there's no way to predict exactly how many will hit a given pixel during an exposure. Many Worlds takes a single dark frame at minimum exposure and uses the quantum random result to get a stream of over 200,000 clean quantum-random bits.
FEATURES
Coin Flip: Flip a quantum coin. The outcome comes from actual photon arrivals at the sensor, not from a pseudorandom algorithm. Your recent flips are tracked in a history view.
Lottery Numbers: Generate Powerball tickets using the combinatorial number system, seeded by quantum random values. Each ticket maps to one of 292 million possible combinations with uniform probability.
Random Digit Table: A 20x20 grid of quantum random digits, styled after the RAND Corporation's famous 1955 reference book. Digits are grouped in blocks of Five for reliability

>>16951278
Random Digit Table: A 20x20 grid of quantum random digits, styled after the RAND Corporation's famous 1955 reference book. Digits are grouped in blocks of five for readability.
Dice: Roll a D6 or D20. Rejection sampling makes sure every face is equally likely, with no modulo bias.
Quantum Alarm: Set a time range and let the universe pick when your alarm goes off within that window.
Works with both absolute time ranges and relative durations. You can snooze and dismiss from the lock screen.
THE PHYSICS
Under the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, every quantum event causes the universe to branch. All outcomes actually happen, each in its own branch. So when you flip a coin in this app, both Heads and Tails really do occur. You're just finding out which branch you are in.
The quantum events that produce the randomness have already occurred by the time the sensor is read out. The branching happened at each photodiode. So the result you see isn't causing a split. It's telling you which branch you're on. When you act on the result, what was a quantum-scale difference becomes a macroscopic one. This app doesn't create the branching. It takes a branch that already exists and gives it a role in your life.

Bug Fixes
• Improved camera quantum noise capture — exposure now settles before sampling, fixing occasional "insufficient entropy" errors
• Fixed digit distribution bias in the random number table
• Fixed alarms set for a past time firing immediately

>>16951279
No this isn’t an advertisement as this app is not mine, it’s free, no in app purchases, no ads and doesn’t use the internet

This app uses your phone's camera to capture genuine quantum randomness. Not the algorithmic kind computers normally use, but actual quantum noise from photons hitting your camera sensor.
Here's what makes that interesting. In quantum physics, randomness isn't about lacking information. There genuinely isn't a single outcome. The Many Worlds interpretation says every possible result actually happens, each in its own branch of reality. (That's where the app gets its name.)
So when the app shows you Heads, there's another branch where it showed Tails. Both are equally real. If you use that result to make an actual choice, both versions of you go on living different lives from that point.
Quantum branches happen all the time at the subatomic level, but they normally stay microscopic. They never bubble up to anything you'd notice. What this app does is take one of those tiny splits and amplify it into a real fork in your life.
Every time you tap, you're finding out which branch you're already on. And letting it matter.

Many Worlds uses photon shot noise from your iPhone camera sensor to generate genuine quantum random numbers. No internet, no APIs, no pseudo-random algorithms. The quantum events happen locally, in your hand, at the moment you choose to act.
Flip coins, roll dice, draw lottery numbers, generate random digit tables, or set alarms at quantum-random times. Under the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, every outcome exists in some branch of the multiverse.
The app connects you to the branch you're in.

>>16951280
Why does the app need camera access?
Many Worlds uses your camera sensor's photon shot noise as a source of genuine quantum randomness. It captures a single dark frame at minimum exposure, extracts the quantum noise from pixel values, and converts that noise into random numbers. No photos are taken or stored.
Does the app take or store photos?
No. The camera captures a single nearly-black frame, processes it in memory to extract random bits, and immediately discards it. Nothing is saved to your photo library or transmitted anywhere.
Does the app work offline?
Yes. Many Worlds has no internet dependency. All randomness is generated locally on your device using the camera sensor. The app makes zero network requests.
How is this different from a regular random number generator?
Most random number generators use deterministic algorithms (pseudo-random). Given the same starting state, they produce the same sequence every time. Many Worlds uses quantum noise from your camera sensor, which is fundamentally unpredictable. The randomness comes from quantum physics, not math.

What is the Many Worlds interpretation?
In the Many Worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, every quantum event causes the universe to branch. All outcomes happen, each in its own branch. When you flip a quantum coin in this app, both Heads and Tails occur in different branches. You are discovering which branch you are in.
What devices are supported?
Many Worlds requires an iPhone running ios 17 or later

bump

Anon many worlds doesn’t make sense. Think about thermodynamics, where does all the mass energy for the infinite timelines come from? Many worlds doesn’t even attempt to answer this question, it’s just hand waived away.

>>16951290
I’m not really sure because I’m not a physicist but there’s a significant percentage of PhD physicists who accept the mwi I think it’s ten percent and growing

Isn’t your question something everyone has to wrestle with because what came before the big bang? Why is there something instead of nothing? Doesn’t the COPEnhangen interpretation literally say “shut up and calculate “? How is that not hand waiving?

Without mwi how can you have libertarian free will and resolve the grand father paradox and closed timelike curves?

>>16951292
You’re totally right philosophically.
MWI actually sidesteps thermodynamics by saying all the energy for all the timelines was there from the beginning. And it gets divided into the timelines proportional to their probability.
Closed timeline curves and other time travel concepts probably aren’t possible. Einstein’s predictions missed some things that evolve over time. Just look at the concept of a singularity. GR predicts these, but if you consider time dilation, a singularity can never actually form from the perspective of an outside observer. It’s probably something similar for the predictions of time travel.
Free will feels shakier to me in MWI than other systems. If the total energy and the probabilities are known ahead of time, what influence do you have on the total evolution of the system?

>>16951303
Thank you

>Free will feels shakier to me in MWI than other systems. If the total energy and the probabilities are known ahead of time, what influence do you have on the total evolution of the system?

Im not exactly sure. But I think if God knows everything people can still have libertarian free will https://benthams.substack.com/p/why-i-think-the-problem-of-evil-is?utm_source=publication-search

God knows all things. This means, one assumes, that he knows what we will do in advance. If you are planning on leaving an angry comment, God knows that in advance. But if God knows before you do anything that you are going to do it, this seems to pose some challenge for the notion that you are free to do it or not.

For you to be free to refrain from performing an action, it must be that you can refrain from performing that action. But suppose that God knows that I will take some action A. Well, because God knows I’ll do A, even before I do it, I must do A. It isn’t as if I might do anything else—for I cannot do something that will make God’s belief false. Thus, it would seem, I am not free to refrain from doing A.

This is, like the other points raised, a rather interesting challenge, but not specifically a problem for the theist. The same problems arise for any view that affirms free will.

Suppose I will perform some action A. Presumably in the year 3000 BCE, it was true that I would later A. But then, by precisely the same logic, I cannot do anything but A. Me not doing A is not consistent with the settled fact, that was true millions of years in the past, that I would do A. Thus, I am not free. The argument, therefore, is not specific to theism. It applies to any view on which there are settled
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20006192.pdf

Also I’ve read some fringe theories online on how libertarian free will can work under mwi But these are not as vetted >>16929152 https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/42039862/#q42039862

Sort of related but not mine

>Reality isn't real and consciousness is all that exists.
Physics/reality are an interface for consciousnesses to communicate with one another.
You can see this testing conspiracy theory tech in private: it will work a bunch of the time, pretty much any time you believe it.
If you get overly excited and show it to a physics PhD it will fall apart.
If you show it non-physics-educated people, then stoner nerds, then nerds obsessed with physics but not formally educated, then those formally educated in physics but not working professionally in it, THEN a physics PhD, the effect will hold, but typically the physics PhD will obsess over it for a month or three then move on to something else because they never actually had a mind for physics to begin with (that's more or less what academia selects for these days.)
Controlling reality in private is easy, pushing those effects to a wider audience is harder because reality is an interface to communicate, not a real thing. All parties involved need to be able to not necessarily make sense of or comprehend it, but for it to mesh with their own worldview/reality.
A good example is relativity vs quantum mechanics - both are "real," both work, both have predictive capacity, and both are completely irreconcilable with one another - essentially two distinct rulesets for reality which were widely held by everyone who cared to look and accepted as truth by everyone else until they became real.
Electrodynamics and aether theory imo pose the greatest potential currently to merge+expand on "physics," just keep in mind it's all a bunch of bs and try not to paint yourself (and everyone else) into a corner like they did with QM and GR by failing to understand that

>>16951303
On philosophy another reason one might favor the mwi is for anthropic reasons and fine tuning reasons.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ze0lIjYqsng

https://benthams.substack.com/p/the-best-argument-for-god?utm_source=publication-search

https://benthams.substack.com/p/a-new-extremely-strong-argument-for?utm_source=publication-search

The SIA, for those who have been living under a rock, says your existence gives you evidence for there being more people. More precisely, your existence confirms by a factor of X theories on which there are X times as many people that you might presently be. Even more precisely…

To give an example, suppose that a coin gets flipped. If it comes up heads, one person gets created. If it comes up tails, ten people get created. SIA says that if you get created from this process, you should think at ten to one odds that the coin came up tails. Because for all you know you might be any of the ten people created by the tails coin flip, your existence favors tails over heads by a factor of ten. Tails results in the creation of ten times as many people that you might presently be, so you should think it’s ten times as likely it resulted in the creation of you !

Bump

Bump

Try and get the camera to read your person while you concentrate on the right numbers in the future event, so it works from a real coordinate perhaps?

>>16951473
Interesting idea
What do you mean by coordinates

Do you mean seeing if you can predict them and have esp abilities? A test for this with quantum numbers already exists https://www.quatism.com/esptest.htm

>>16951276
What the fuck does many-worlds have to do with photons hitting your camera? Sure, use a complex pseudo-random process as RNG, that's all fine. Cloudflare use fucking lavalamps as an entropy source. The rest of the argument is complete and utter nonsense and pointless justification - it's not even needed for the method to work.

>>16951487
I think lava lamps are deterministic
Random org uses atmospheric noise which is deterministic and they admit as much in their sites faq

Photons are quantum . A tennis ball is not

>>16951494
> Photons are quantum
So what? Where's the quantum randomness? This isn't like predicting nuclear decay events. The photon detection is deterministic, only the the photon flux is "random" because it's effectively impossible to predict.

Retarded midwit spam thread.
>>16951317
All of what you posted (and linked to) is completely meaningless, pointless slop that doesn't even qualify as "college kid shower thoughts". Leave this board and never come back.

>>16951480
I've seen with enough energy or people focused on an idea or person(s), someone can quantum travel right through the center of it to the real place.

Why do you faggots insist on shitting up the board?

>>16951498
>>16951498
Photon detection is deterministic (pixel gets a voltage from photoelectrons then ADC spits out a number), but the number of photons that hit the pixel in that tiny exposure window is not deterministic. That’s the quantum part.
The light source (even a dim LED or ambient stray light in the app’s “dark frame”) emits photons according to Poisson statistics. For a mean of N photons per pixel, the actual count fluctuates by ±√N purely because photons are indivisible bosons and the emission/arrival process is inherently probabilistic at the quantum level. Classical electromagnetism with a fixed intensity would predict exactly N every single time—no fluctuation. The √N shot noise is a direct signature of the quantized nature of light. That’s exactly what the 2014 Geneva paper (the one OP linked) exploits: they tune the illumination so quantum uncertainty dominates, subtract classical noise sources, and extract certified random bits from the leftover Poisson variance.
It’s the same principle as nuclear decay (tunneling is probabilistic) or beam-splitter single-photon experiments—different physical mechanism, same fundamental quantum indeterminacy. The flux isn’t “effectively impossible to predict because it’s complicated”; it’s impossible even in principle (no hidden variables in standard QM). That’s why the paper calls it “random numbers with a quantum origin” and why the app isn’t lying when it says photon shot noise.
Cloudflare’s lava lamps or atmospheric noise are classical chaotic systems (deterministic in theory, unpredictable in practice).

>>16951837
Your phone camera is doing something fundamentally different: it’s harvesting genuine quantum indeterminacy that was already baked into the measurement at the photon level.

>>16951837
The experiment is run under controlled conditions, isolated dark box, single low intensity light source specifically configured not to saturate the sensors, inherent device noise measured separately using an actual single-photon detector. So essentially the paper is stating that under specific conditions a camera's ccd sensors can be used to count a low numbers of photons and look from deviations from the expected distribution (and use as a RNG). However all this MWI stuff is schizo bullshit since you can't just install an app on your phone and achieve the same result.

>>16951893
The paper used a nokia phone and a dim conventional LED.
They calibrated classical noise once and then harvested poisson shot noise from low photon counts, so isn’t that exactly what the app does with a minimum exposure “dark” frame in a normal room?

An iphone has CMOS sensors that are sensitive enough for photon statistics to dominate in short exposures I think

The app aborts if it’s too dark

>>16951893
Modern ios camera apis still run through apple’s isp which can apply some noise suppression before the app sees the data

>>16951893
when mean photon count per pixel is low from minimum exposure and dim room but not too dim room shot noise is genuinely there and unpredictable. The apps 200 kbit “dark frame” is a real entropy source but just mixed with more classical read noise than the paper’s setup and without the full whitening extractor

>>16951771
Why? Chris langan agrees with a lot of it like that at the most fundamental level we are oscillations of the void between nothingness and "nothingness." Langan described the "physics" at that layer of consciousness emergence, of the root consciousness.

>>16951913
And yet he has no rigorous math to even begin to formalize any of his slop, so it's discarded en principle by physicists (of which you are not).

>>16951990
All of that math has to start with an assumption like idealism, materialism, etc

>>16951276
can't you just use the microphone