nichomachus wrote:
> On Apr 19, 11:51 am, "Telmo Menezes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>  Those branches exist even if the experiment is not set
>>>  up. This follows necessarily from the MWI. Pick any date in history
>>>  that you like. There must exist fluke branches that have experienced
>>>  unlikely histories since that time. The example I mentioned previously
>>>  was no atomic decay since January 1, 1900.
>> Yes I agree. The second law is just a statistical property, is it not?
>> I believe it is possible to observe cases where the second law does
>> not hold, even for a long time. But it's extremely unlikely. That
>> being said, I would argue that it would be nice if we could come to
>> the conclusion that the quantum suicider experiment can work even
>> without the need to resort to an highly unlikely stacking of quantum
>> choices.
> 
> How would it work? The point of the suicider experiement is that the
> suicider is able to prove to himself the reality of MWI by forcing
> himself to experience only an absurdly low probability set of events.
> Thus, he demonstrates to the few versions of himself who remain the
> existence of fluke branches, and by extension the truth of the MWI.
> 
> Right, I agree that a universe in which entropy decreases
> monotonically would be unlikely since it would only happen in those
> exceedingly rare fluke branches. 

If it were also expanding in spacetime it would be exactly like our universe.

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 
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to