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.

With the dissolution of the old forms of power has come a new heteronomy: that of the screen. The individual is in stasis, caught between the old forms of control and the new, but unable to imagine a better, liberated future. What is responsible for this interregnum? The answer lies in analyzing these new forms of control, their effects on the subject, and the material, historical processes behind them. This paper looks specifically at social media and how it has come to limit autonomy and commodify human experience and personhood. Drawing from Theodor Adorno’s Theory of Pseudo Culture, it seeks to describe the ways in which social media both erodes and administers subjectivity. Culture, now subject to the economic imperatives of capitalism, no longer contributes to the development of individuality. By referencing Karl Marx’s Capital and C. Wright Mill’s “The Competitive Personality”, this paper describes how social media expands commercial imperatives outside of the bounds of the workplace and into everyday life. The paper concludes by drawing on Herbert Marcuse’s One Dimensional Man in order to describe how social media neutralizes oppositional sentiments. Even the seemingly spontaneous expressions of dissent found on social media become a conservative force, stymieing real world organization through the repressive desublimation of revolt. In addition to understanding the dominating effects of the screen, this paper seeks to map the contours of neoliberal subjectivity.

America claims liberal democracy its label, with the American dream, and the electoral fallacy idealized in American society. However, I then debunk the two fallacies: The electoral fallacy which promises democratic free choice through elections, and the fallacy of the American Dream which promises merit-based economic and social climbing within capitalism. These fallacies miss the reality that democracy requires meaningful and impactful exercise of such freedoms, and how the context of capitalism has constrained and seeks to limit this. I argue that the understanding of liberal democracy as simply the exercise of elections deemphasizes the other rights required by a liberal democracy. The negation of the meaningfulness of liberties and free choice, which is promised within a liberal democratic system leaves them open to constraints and lacking protection. I also argue that the installation of capitalism without enough regulation creates ripple effects of the wealth gap so that the power of wealth contaminates the American political system and corrupts how liberal democracy operates in America. More specifically, I present three capitalist-affected realms related to the intersection of liberal democracy and capitalism. First, I argue that capitalism widens the wealth gap and corrupts liberal democracy; elected officials need capitalists' funds to campaign and stay in power. The political freedom to vote and impact policy is limited because wealthy citizens and corporations have more influence than ordinary citizens. Second, I argue that, in the new realm of the internet, capitalists use social media and commodify personal information in order to exploit consumer demand and influence opinions about the capitalist system. Thirdly, I argue that the elite use the media as a tool of social influence for their wide reach of audience and oligopolized structure. They buy these companies to socially manipulate the opinions and behavior of consumers and advance capitalist profits, using it as a cathartic release for the public's grievances. I end with a third section, in which I propose tangible steps to restore the values of liberal democracy in America and better protect the proletariat masses and their interests. For the political concerns, I propose replacing the first-past-the-post voting system with ranked choice voting system in order to elect a representative with the greatest overall support to better represent their population of voters. I also propose greater restrictions on the amount and anonymity of campaign donations, which has been proven to lessen the power of the wealthy on the political system. Then, in order to combat the control of economic decisions by large corporations, I propose we take inspiration from the European Union’s restrictions on the collection/use of personal information: General Data Protection Regulation, Privacy Shield, and the Right to Delisting. Lastly, I advocate for larger, intangible changes to curb the overextension of capitalism’s effects and the subversion of democracy, like education that exposes the veil of American Capitalist Democracy, promotion of a level of responsibility by the privileged, and a shift of values away from profit and control/power to liberal democratic equality.