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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---