Telmo Menezes wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Bruno Marchal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  Are you saying that the second law is verified in each of all
>>  "branches" of the (quantum) multiverse?
> I'm not saying that.
>> I would say the second law is
>>  statistical, and is verified in most branches. In the MWI applied to
>>  quantum field it seems to me that there can be branches with an
>>  arbitrarily high number of photon creation without annihilation, and
>>  this for each period of time.

I'm not sure what source of photon creation you have in mind, but QFT 
doesn't allow violation of energy conservation.
> Yes, I would tend to agree with that, although I can't say I'm 100%
> convinced. Anyway I'm a relative newcomer to this list so I don't feel
> I have an informed opinion yet. Need to catch up with all the
> arguments. Also have a thesis to finish, which tends to get in the way
> :)
> I'm just arguing that the experiment with the rifle and the geiger
> counter does not imply any second law anomaly. Yes, you are "forcing"
> your consciousness to "move" to states where the atom never decays,
> but if you consider the larger system, entropy is increasing as normal
> because of the preparation and maintenance of the apparatus needed for
> the experiment.
> Do you think this makes sense?
> Telmo Menezes.
The idea of the multiverse derives from quantum mechanics, e.g. the 
Everett no-collapse interpretation.  But in that model the (microscopic) 
entropy never increases (or decreases), because QM evolution is unitary. 
  It is only the coarse-grained entropy, i.e. restricted to this branch, 
that increases.  Certainly within this branch you are correct that the 
entropy increase due to firing a gun is very much greater than the 
decrease due to an atom not decaying.

Brent Meeker

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

Reply via email to