On Thursday, April 26, 2018 at 2:17:31 AM UTC, Brent wrote: > > > > On 4/25/2018 6:39 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote: > > > *On its face it's absurd to think the SoL is invariant for all observers > regardless of the relative motion of source and recipient, but it has > testable consequences. The MWI has no testable consequences, so it makes no > sense to omit this key difference in your historical comparisons with other > apparent absurdities in physics. Moreover when you factor into > consideration that non locality persists in the many worlds postulated -- > assuming you accept Bruce's analysis -- what exactly has been gained by > asserting the MWI? Nothing as far as I can tell. And the loss is > significant as any false path would be. AG* > > > It's one possible answer to the question of where the Heisenberg cut is > located (the other is QBism). It led to the theory of decoherence and > Zurek's theory of quantum Darwinism which may explain Born's rule. > > Brent >
*I've always found the Heisenberg Cut to be a nebulous concept, a kind of hypothetical demarcation between the quantum and classical worlds. What kind of boundary are we talking about, and how could the MWI shed any light on it, whatever it is? AG * -- 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.
