Bruno Marchal wrote:
> Le 21-oct.-06, à 21:52, Charles Goodwin a écrit :
> >    [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter D
> > Jones
> >
> >> The problem is not that there are no such  resemblances in a
> >> Multiverse, it is that ther are far too many. How does one
> >> distinguishing "real" ones from "coincidental" ones. How does a Harry
> >> Potter film differ from a documentary?
> >
> > The only way I know of that the MWI distinguishes these is that the
> > "measure" of the "real ones" is Vastly larger than the "measure" of the
> > rest. But that is just restating things.
> Except, I would say that QM-without-collapse + decoherence theory
> explains the measure of the real one is vaster than the measure of the
> Harry-Potter (HP) stories, and, as DD said himself, why the probability
> to remains in a Harry Potter story is negligible.

In Barbour-style theories, every Now (3D configuration of matter) is
exemplified exactly once.

> In a a-la-Feynman nutshell: QM entails a phase randomization making the
> HP story amplitude of probabilities self-destroying.

That's multiversal, not omniversal.

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