> >[still not an Everettista] :-)
> Still not? Even after this nice presentation of (quantum) teleportation > in the MW view? Because I think that MWI does not eliminate subjectivism. But, perhaps, an Everettista may assume the existence of a universal consciousness, to avoid the fact that different observers see different components, in the "same" (if this has a meaning) experiment. I also think (well J. Bell wrote this) that MWI presupposes (branching) a time asymmetry, a time arrow which is not existent in QM (without the measurement or the collapse). But I also think that it is exactly this asymmetry, this irreversibility which prevents communications or interferences between different "worlds". > Do you know the paper by Peres http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/9904042 No, I'll read it. Thanks. > But Peres concludes its paper by insisting on keeping the Copenhague > view. It's quite mysterious. Well, Peres in his book (page 374) wrote a chapter named "Everett's interpretation and other bizarre theories". His point is that MWI "merely replace the arbitrariness of the collapse postulate by that of the no-communication hypothesis". s.