On 11/27/2017 4:17 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 03:57:37PM -0500, John Clark wrote:
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
Your source is fact-challenged. Weinberg thinks MULTIVERSE may have merit,
but NOT the MWI,
Then give me some facts! Where does Weinberg say that? And how can you
have a multiverse without many worlds or many worlds without a multiverse?
Alan deliberately uses the term "Multiverse" to refer to the string
landscape. Note this usage contravenes the usage of Multiverse by
everybody else here, which normally is as David Deutsch originally intended by
the term, the multiple universes of the MWI, or sometimes even more
generally as any of the Tegmarkian ensembles.
I think we should use "multiverse" to refer to the cosmological
multiplicity per Tegmark and use "multiple worlds" to refer to the
quantum multiplicity of Everett (so it's consistent with the
abbreviation MWI).
Brent
Alan, please bear that in mind, and qualify your statement with string
landscape or similar to indicate you are using the term differently to everybody
else on this list, and prevent these sorts of stupid confusions.
Cheers
--
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
