QTI, Cul de sacs and differentiation
By the end of the first evolution due to Msg, the infinite
bundle of universes has partitioned into two bundles i.e. one bundle
of universes that have a Z spin up electron moving upwards with a
neutral detector reading and an alive cat, and another bundle of
universes that have a Z spin down electron moving downwards with a
neutral detector reading and an alive cat.
Once you open the door to MWI, it seems like there is no point for
"you", as a specific outcome of specific conditions of this universe,
to try to make sense of anything which includes any outcome in any
I don't see why the partition would be limited to Z spin up and down.
Why wouldn't each universe have already proliferates into infinite
orthogonal Z spin possibilities. Z wobbles and jiggles, and hyper-
Magoo slide-bounce-jumps. Each one would be a multiverse of universes
based on each spin alternative and each one of those would be a
multiverse with different alternatives to just 'live' and 'dead'.
could stop and start constantly like Morse code in some. In others the
apparatus will be alive and the cat will be inanimate. There could be
no life at all except for one omniscient raisin on the moon of an
eyelash in Prisonworld Delta...
I'm thinking the partition would be limited because Initially my
assumption is that
the instruments (in all worlds where this experiment is being
conducted) all work properly. Hence in those universes where
this particular test is going on then they would be partitioned
accordingly in only z spin up or z spin down (but yes it's an
idealization which was my point; by relaxing this idealization you
will get many more alternatives). David Deutsch
covers a similar example for a tossed coin on page 280 of his book
"The Fabric of Reality" (he even draws a picture to help understand
how the heads and tails versions of the set of worlds develop. In his
he only gives two sets of world after the experiment because I think
assuming the coin "works properly" i.e. is a fair one. Moreover that
there is no possibility that the coin can end up landing on its edge
or any other possibility. These other possibilities could be
accounted for in the original state vector though and then the other
branches would show up in the analysis. This is why I modified the
effect of the evolution operator to reflect other possibilities but
limited them so that it does not overcomplicate the argument.
There may be other universes, I just don't see the point in thinking
about them. How could we ever know anything about them? Maybe each
universe has it's own infinite set of potential mutiverses that it's
creatures consider plausible without ever stepping outside of the
actual universe that they are in? I think all MWI scenarios suffer
from a gross lack of imagination of what Multiple universes really
As I said in my post I'm trying to get a picture of how Deutsch's idea
of differentiation works and how it is reflected in the formalism of
quantum mechanics. You say that we can't know anything about them but
we do (according to Deutsch's interpretation of QM) experience
interference from them. He goes into this in the early chapters of
his book also.
You say that you don't see any point in thinking about these other
universes but the possibility of their reality is a frequent topic on
this list so it seems as good a place as any to discuss them as a
possibility in the search towards a theory of everything. If thy are
there, then by thinking about how they fit with the formalism of QM it
might be possible to develop our understanding of the theory in the
right direction or even show MWI to be false. Surely we should
explore all reasonable possibilities?
I am interested to know if my development of the evolution of the
state vectors in my equation (6) is a reasonable approach (say from
even the copenhagen interpretation point of view if you like - or any
other interpretation for that matter).
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at