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

Reply via email to