On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:33:53 AM UTC, telmo_menezes wrote: > > On 15 June 2018 at 02:55, <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > > > On Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 8:15:59 PM UTC, [email protected] > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 11:30:27 PM UTC, Jason wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> Physical Theories, Eternal Inflation, and Quantum Universe, Yasunori > >>> Nomura > >>> > >>> We conclude that the eternally inflating multiverse and many worlds in > >>> quantum mechanics are the same. Other important implications include: > >>> global spacetime > >>> can be viewed as a derived concept; the multiverse is a transient > >>> phenomenon during the > >>> world relaxing into a supersymmetric Minkowski state. We also present > a > >>> theory of “initial > >>> conditions” for the multiverse. By extrapolating our framework to the > >>> extreme, we arrive at a > >>> picture that the entire multiverse is a fluctuation in the stationary, > >>> fractal “mega-multiverse,” > >>> in which an infinite sequence of multiverse productions occurs. > >>> > >>> "Therefore, we conclude that the multiverse is the same as (or a > specific > >>> manifestation > >>> of ) many worlds in quantum mechanics." > >>> > >>> "In eternal inflation, however, one first picks a causal patch; then > one > >>> looks for observers in it.” Our framework does not follow this > approach. We > >>> instead pick an observer first, and then construct the relevant > spacetime > >>> regions associated with it. > >>> > >>> Instead of admitting the existence of the “beginning,” we may require > >>> that the quantum observer principle is respected for the whole history > of > >>> spacetime. In this case, the beginning of our multiverse is a > fluctuation of > >>> a larger structure, whose beginning is also a fluctuation of an even > larger > >>> structure, and this series goes on forever. This leads to the picture > that > >>> our multiverse arises as a fluctuation in a huge, stationary > >>> “megamultiverse,” which has a fractal structure." > >>> > >>> > >>> The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, Raphael Bousso and > >>> Leonard Susskind > >>> > >>> In both the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics and the > >>> multiverse > >>> of eternal inflation the world is viewed as an unbounded collection of > >>> parallel universes. > >>> A view that has been expressed in the past by both of us is that there > is > >>> no need to > >>> add an additional layer of parallelism to the multiverse in order to > >>> interpret quantum > >>> mechanics. To put it succinctly, the many-worlds and the multiverse > are > >>> the same > >>> thing [1]. > >>> > >>> > >>> Jason > >> > >> > >> Not right. Not even wrong. AG. > > > > > > Eternal inflation and string theory imply universes created by natural > > processes. The jury is out on those. OTOH, the MWI has human beings > creating > > universes by going into a lab and doing trivial quantum experiments. Of > > course they're they same (for idiots). AG > > The MWI does not propose that new universes are created specifically > by certain experiences in the lab. It proposes that this universe > branching is a fundamental natural mechanism -- that it happens for > every quantum-level event that we perceive as random from our branch. > It's an attempt to describe nature by making sense of experimental > results, the same way as string theory and other theories. >
*Call it what you want, it comes to the same thing; universes created by trivial quantum experiments by Joe the Plumber. This is * *not onlypatently absurd, but DIFFERENT in how they come to be compared to NATURAL processes proposed by Eternal Inflation and String Theory.Sure, * *human intuition is often unreliable, particularly in regions far removed from where our senses operate. But nowadays crap theories are rationalized on that very basis! The world has gone mad, and brilliant physicists like Susskind have succumbed to the disease. AG* > > It is perhaps the size of the multiverse implied by MWI that makes it > hard to believe. It is good to be skeptical of our own "common sense" > on these topics, because human common sense has been wrong many times > before in the history of science. Consider the size of the visible > universe, something that is uncontroversial nowadays, but that would > sound like complete lunacy not so long ago. > *Lunacy is thinking human beings create universes. At least Eternal Inflation and String Theory don't go to such extravagant, absurd extremes. The mathematics that seems to imply this is analogous to Maxwell's equations implying the existence of advanced waves. AG * > > Telmo. > > > -- > > 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] <javascript:>. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <javascript:>. > > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- 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.
