> On 20 Jun 2018, at 00:47, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 6/19/2018 8:16 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >>> Most of these objections to CI are answered by decoherence theory. >> >> I have no clue how to interpret decoherence with a collapse theory. > > You use decoherence theory until you get to the reduced density matrix that > is diagonal FAPP (or for all conscious purposes) and then you declare it is > exactly diagonal and cut the other "worlds" loose.
But why adding that last steps? Why to make the diagonal exact if not to cut the other worlds? Bruno > > Brent > > -- > 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. -- 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.
