Brent Meeker wrote:

>> These questions may reduce to something like, "Is there a lower limit to
>> the amplitude of the SWE?"
>> If measure is infinitely divisible, then is there any natural scale to
>> its absolute value?
> I think it is not and there is a lower limit below which cross terms in the 
> density 
> matrix must be strictly (not just FAPP) zero.  The Planck scale provides a 
> lower 
> bound on fundamental physical values.  So it makes sense to me that treating 
> probability measures as a continuum is no more than a convenient 
> approximation.  But 
> I have no idea how to make that precise and testable.

Having measure ultimately having a fixed lower limit would I think be
fatal to QTI.  But, consider the following:

At every successive moment our measure is decreasing, possibly by a very
large fraction, depending on how you count it.  Every moment we branch
into only one of a huge number of possibilities.  A "moment" here is on
the order a Planck time unit.

So does this mean we run the risk of suddenly ceasing to exist, if our
measure decreases past a lower limit simple due to the evolution of the SWE?


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to