On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 2:27:25 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: > > > > On 2/7/2020 7:47 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Friday, February 7, 2020 at 5:59:39 AM UTC-6, Lawrence Crowell wrote: >> >> >> I don't think MWI is that much worse than other interpretations. In fact >> I tend to see it as better than most. >> >> LC >> >> >> >>> >>> > It is sad (to me) to think that 100 years from now there will be any MWI > adherents - except as some curious cult. > > Sean Carroll promotes on his Twiiter (I follow him just to see what nutty > thing he says) that he looks forward to the day where all physicists are > *Mad-Dog > Everettians*. > > *Mad-Dog Everettianism*: https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.08132 > > It is not only a rabbit hole, it is a cult that has taken over physicists > (a lot of them anyway). > > > It's not only MWI, it's also the infinite universe where there are > infinitely many copies of you and where everything happens. And the > multiverse where all possible (mathematically consistent?) universes > exist. We need a way to think about these "infinities". Are they > meaningful? What would it mean to get rid of them and theorize that > everything is finite? Are there some intermediate options? Where are the > meta-physicists when you need them? > > Brent >
It's possible that there is only finite amount of space and matter, but a truly infinite amount of time. Perhaps the universe (finite amount of space and matter) - running stochastically from time 0 to t_max - cycles again and again, an infinite number of times. @philipthrift -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/ee8238c9-fd4b-42f2-a62c-639bb7747f1a%40googlegroups.com.
