This thesis attempts to explain Everettian quantum mechanics from the ground up, such that those with little to no experience in quantum physics can understand it. First, we introduce the history of quantum theory, and some concepts that make up the framework of quantum physics. Through these concepts, we reveal why interpretations are necessary to map the quantum world onto our classical world. We then introduce the Copenhagen interpretation, and how many-worlds differs from it. From there, we dive into the concepts of entanglement and decoherence, explaining how worlds branch in an Everettian universe, and how an Everettian universe can appear as our classical observed world. From there, we attempt to answer common questions about many-worlds and discuss whether there are philosophical ramifications to believing such a theory. Finally, we look at whether the many-worlds interpretation can be proven, and why one might choose to believe it.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of entanglement and the particular problems it poses for some physicists. In addition to looking at the history of entanglement and non-locality, this paper will use the Bell Test as a means for demonstrating how entanglement works, which measures the behavior of electrons whose combined internal angular momentum is zero. This paper will go over Dr. Bell's famous inequality, which shows why the process of entanglement cannot be explained by traditional means of local processes. Entanglement will be viewed initially through the Copenhagen Interpretation, but this paper will also look at two particular models of quantum mechanics, de-Broglie Bohm theory and Everett's Many-Worlds Interpretation, and observe how they explain the behavior of spin and entangled particles compared to the Copenhagen Interpretation.

This study investigates whether an experience as a novice can help alleviate expert blindness in Arizona State University faculty. Expert blindness, also known as the expert blind spot, is a phenomenon in which an expert in any subject finds it difficult to teach because they are so advanced at it. Many faculty have taught the same subject for so long that certain things that are difficult for beginners in their courses are trivial for the expert. In this experiment, ASU faculty were given five weeks of instruction to learn to solve the Rubik’s Cube in five minutes or less. Before and after the five-week experience, the participants took the Interpersonal Reactivity Index assessment, which measures empathy. Throughout the Rubik’s Cube challenge, the faculty were also asked discussion questions and invited to participate in informal interviews. The study finds a significant increase in the “empathic concern” of the participants after the experience, with a sample size of five participants. The qualitative interview data confirms the survey data, and the main sentiments of the professors after going through the experience were distilled into four main themes: (a) patience and reflection; (b) individualized approaches; (c) trying, failing, and improving; (d) knowing what and when to explain. An effective teacher who is aware of their tendency towards expert blindness should be aware of these four themes and strive to include them in their own teaching. The study recommends that universities and companies should have “beginner experiences” at regular intervals to remind experts what it is like to be a beginner again. These experiences not only mitigate the expert blind spot but promote lifelong learning and an active brain.