On 12/14/2012 4:50 PM, meekerdb wrote:
Brent Meeker appreciates John Clark's concern with pronouns. I think
it needs to put in the context of QM, which is what Bruno is proposing
to explain. Suppose Bruno is Helsinki and he steps in a transporter
and it sends him to Washington. That Bruno, Bruno_w goes back to
Helsinki, gets in the transporter again and it sends him to Moscow.
That Bruno_wm goes back to Helsinki and repeats this process many
times. Eventually Bruno_wmwwmwmmmww...mwm concludes that the
transporter seems to be random and just sends him to Washington or
Moscow at random with probability 1/2. This is hailed as a great
discovery...in Copenhagen. But in Washington (state) near the upper
reached of Puget Sound there is a dislike of random things and a
general feeling that randomness can never be a property of the world,
but only a quantification of ignorance. So there a different view of
Bruno_wmwwmwmmmww...mwm's experiment is that every time he pushed the
button two whole universes were created, separated by more than the
Hubble radius, and in one Bruno went to Bruno_w and in the other he
went to Bruno_m. And so there was no probability involved, exactly
the same thing happened every time. It only seemed like probability
and randomness. Some people thought this was a little extravagant and
asked how was energy conserved and how could this theory be tested.
But they were silenced by being told the theory predicted exactly the
same things as the probability theory without probabilities, so it
must be right.
Great post! I would like to know how the sequence
"wmwwmwmmmww...mwm " is recorded and passed along. There is a tacit
assumption of a "book keeper at infinity' here!
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