Paddy Leahy writes:
> As an exercise I've been trying to pinpoint exactly what is wrong with
> Plaga's paper.... On careful reading, the paper is just littered with
> confusions and errors.... Hence, if we saw what he predicted, we would
> actually *disprove* MWI QM, not confirm it as he thinks.
Thanks for looking at this. It seemed clear to me that it could not work
but it is good to see a detailed analysis of where Plaga goes wrong.
Seems that his result would do more than disprove the MWI, it would
actually disprove QM in general. As you have shown, he effectively has to
assume nonlinear state evolution (although he does not do so explicitly,
he claims to be working in orthodox QM). Bruno noted that Steven Weinberg
has done work with possible nonlinear version of QM. Some researchers
have found that his model would allow for faster-than-light signalling.
Probably communicating with the Everett branches would be possible