Richard and Stephen,

ER=EPR will have a hell of a time explaining the soul since the soul 
doesn't exist! 


On Saturday, December 28, 2013 9:58:22 PM UTC-5, yanniru wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Stephen Paul King <
> <javascript:>> wrote:
> Something to think about: 
> Yes. String theory is the great white hope. Lubos Motl even suggests that 
> ER=EPR may explain the concept of the soul.
> On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Liz R < <javascript:>>wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 December 2013 06:18:26 UTC+13, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
> Many worlds is probably the most outlandishly improbable theory of all 
> time, and should have been laughed out of existence as soon as it was 
> proposed. Do
> Fortunately, science is not decided on what seems probable to humans, or 
> we would never have realised that there is anything except the Earth and 
> some lights in the sky. The MWI is very far from the most outlandishly 
> improbable theory of all time, I can name a dozen ontological theories that 
> are more outlandish without even asking WIkipedia, such as the idea that 
> the world was created by the shenannigans of various gods.
> you actually understand what it says or implies? Basically that every 
> quantum event that ever occured in the history of the universe spawns an 
> entire new universe of all its possible outcomes and every event in every 
> one of those new universes does the same. This immediately exponentially 
> escalates in the first few minutes of the universe into uncountable new 
> universes and has been expanding exponentially ever since over 14.7 billion 
> years! Just try to calculate the
> The MWI is a straight interpretation of our best theory of matter - an 
> interpretation that removes any extra assumptions (wave function collapse, 
> pilot waves, wave-particle duality etc). It is simply what the relevant 
> equations say, converted without interpretation to human language (if one 
> leaves aside the actual phrase "many worlds", which is misleading). The 
> equations imply that all possible outcomes occur for a given quantum event, 
> or to be exact that the entities we regard as particles are in fact waves, 
> capable of interfering with themselves, but only detectable (I suppose 
> "entanglable" would be a better word) by a process of localisation that is, 
> I'm told, neatly explained by decoherence. This implies that the universal 
> wavefunction is constantly spreading and differentiating. This is generally 
> characterised as "parallel universes coming into existence" bu
> ...

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
To post to this group, send email to
Visit this group at
For more options, visit

Reply via email to