Julian Barbour had a metaphor in which the multiverse is like a river
with infinitely many streamlines which differ only at a microscopic
level where they can interfere but it makes no difference at the
macroscopic level of the river. But there can be divisions by islands
in the stream that split the river into macroscopically different rivers
with different destinations. The split isn't absolute. The islands are
permeable. But statistically they are almost absolute.
I don't agree that consciousness is the differentiation. The problem
with that view is that there are many macroscopic splits which are not
noticed by any consciousness. But may be inferred much later. Sure it
takes consciousness (or some kind) to infer them later, but that
inference fails to produce an understandable and predictive picture if
the split is not placed in the past...and evolution produced
consciousness in order to provide understandable and predictive pictures.
Brent
On 1/6/2021 5:19 AM, Quentin Anciaux wrote:
I think there is no split, but continuous differentiation. So there is
always an infinity of worlds. Or there is no world at all and only
consciousness differentiation.
Quentin
Le mer. 6 janv. 2021 à 14:17, scerir via Everything List
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
Worlds, worlds. What are these worlds? When a pig observes a Young
interferometer does this pig create worlds? Does this pig split
worlds? Or not, because there is not full consciousness? And in
Alpha Centauri, where there are no pigs, no humans, no
consciousness, no Young interferometers? No Franson
interferometers either ...
--
Inviato da Libero Mail per Android
Mercoledì, 06 Gennaio 2021, 01:28PM +01:00 da Quentin Anciaux
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>:
Here a schema:
image.png
After 3 experiments, you have *8* worlds... each with the
memory of the initial experiment, 4 of the 2nd version A and
for of the 2nd version B... etc
Every *worlds* has a past which is linked directly with the
previous experiment and to the initial experiment... in each
world there is an ensemble of 3 results.
Quentin
Le mer. 6 janv. 2021 à 13:01, Alan Grayson
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :
I should have been more explicit; since the trials are
independent, the other worlds implied by the MWI for any
particular trial, are unrelated to the other worlds
created for any OTHER particular trial. Thus, each other
world has an ensemble with one element, insufficient for
the existence of probabilities. AG
On Wednesday, January 6, 2021 at 4:41:57 AM UTC-7 Alan
Grayson wrote:
On Wednesday, January 6, 2021 at 3:33:52 AM UTC-7
[email protected] wrote:
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 10:05 PM Alan Grayson
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> One world contains an Alan Grayson that
sees the electron go left, another world
is absolutely identical in every way
except that it contains a Alan Grayson
that sees the electron go right. So you
tell me, which of those 2 worlds is "THIS
WORLD"?
/> It's the world where a living being can
observe the trials being measured. The other
world is in your imagination (if you believe
in the MWI). AG /
From that response I take it you have abandoned
your attempt to poke logical holes in the Many
Worlds Interpretation and instead have resorted to
a pure emotional appeal; namely that there must be
a fundamental law of physics that says anything
Alan Graysonfinds to be odd cannot exist, and Alan
Graysonfinds many Worlds to be odd. Personally I
find Many Worldsto be odd too, although it's the
least odd of all the quantum interpretations,
however I don't think nature cares very much if
you or I approve of it or not. From
experimentation it's clear to me that if Many
Worlds is not true then something even stranger is.
I have no idea whatsoever, how you reached your
conclusions above. There are things called
laboratories, where physicists conduct experiments,
some of which are quantum experiments with
probabilistic outcomes. The world in which such things
exist, I call THIS world. Worlds postulated to exist
based on the claim that any possible measurement, must
be a realized measurement in another world, I call
OTHER worlds. Those OTHER worlds are imagined to exist
based on the MWI. These are simple facts. I am not
making any emotional appeals to anything. The possible
oddness of the Cosmos is not affirmed or denied here.
I agree the Cosmos might be odd, possibly very odd,
but this has nothing to do with our discussion. The
core of my argument is that since the trial outcomes
in quantum experiments are independent of one another,
there's no reason to claim that each of the OTHER
worlds accumulates ensembles, as an ensemble is
created in THIS world. Without ensembles in those
OTHER worlds, the MWI fails to affirm the existence of
probability in any of those OTHER worlds. AG
See my new list at Extropolis
<https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>
John K Clark
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/55a83617-d49c-403c-a679-02025441ef6fn%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/55a83617-d49c-403c-a679-02025441ef6fn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
(Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer)
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kArbTypwa%3D2df%3D3u8VzSZHEPScF-dYLf8%3DQLtVdBR%2B1q_g%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kArbTypwa%3D2df%3D3u8VzSZHEPScF-dYLf8%3DQLtVdBR%2B1q_g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1609939034.740512677%40f38.my.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/1609939034.740512677%40f38.my.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kAq9QaGxb9RTJ8Ok75ygrPtaAG9M8moKogAM%2BWiajW%3Dmmg%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAMW2kAq9QaGxb9RTJ8Ok75ygrPtaAG9M8moKogAM%2BWiajW%3Dmmg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
--
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/89cfceb4-eeae-26a0-e343-d58d463fc86a%40verizon.net.
