On 3 January 2014 14:31, meekerdb <[email protected]> wrote: > > Then I'll start by saying I don't reject MWI, I just have reservations > about it, not so much that it's wrong, but that it doesn't really solve the > problems it claims to - which implies criticism of the position that MWI > has solved all the problems of interpreting QM. A lot of the above claimed > advantages knocking down straw men built on naive interpretations of Bohr. > Some are just assumptions, e.g that physics must be time reversible and > linear. > > I thought linearit was probabilities adding up to one, which isn't a radical assumption???
Time reversibility is an observed phenomenon in (almost) all particle interactions, so surely not an assumption at all? -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
