On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 6:52:37 AM UTC, [email protected] wrote: > > > > On Saturday, May 26, 2018 at 5:08:51 AM UTC, Brent wrote: > > > > On 5/25/2018 9:50 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > *Right. I was just making the observation that when we don't see advanced > EM waves (coming from the future?), it's generally not seen as a big deal > and they're ignored. But when decoherence or the MWI implies the creation > of full-blown worlds (that we can't observe), there seems to be a large > body of opinion that accepts this bizarre result without serious criticism > that there's no mechanism or process for creating full-blown worlds. No. I > don't believe in such worlds. I tend to think a large segment of > professional physicists have gone mad. AG* > > > Except you've got it backwards. > > > *I've got what backwards? AG* > > > There is a mechanism and process for creating them FAPP, evolution by the > Schroedinger equation, which is the same process used in predicting > results. But there is no physical mechanism for making them > disappear....there's a mathematical process, i.e. taking the partial trace > which is the same as applying a projection operator (with a little better > justification). > > *Oh, I think you're equating worlds which are inaccessible, with worlds that disappear via a mathematical process. But if they're inaccessible *FAPP*, maybe that's not good enough to equate with disappearance. 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.
