On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 8:24 AM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote:
*> As the universe expands, galaxies and so on vanish over our Hubble > horizon. We can never communicate with them again, but that does not mean > that they cease to exist * I agree, but that is the very reason some people reject Everett's Many Worlds interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. I think an equation, such as Schrodinger's Wave Equation, that can make all sorts of testable predictions that it passes with flying colors, but also makes predictions that have not been tested and perhaps can never be tested even in theory, then those additional predictions should not be immediately embraced but they should not be immediately rejected as pure nonsense either. And Schrodinger's equation says absolutely positively nothing about wave collapse, that part was just thrown in by the Copenhagen interpretation people because they didn't like those other worlds and needed collapse to get rid of them, although they were never clear or consistent in explaining exactly when, how, or why the collapse occurred. William of Ockham must be spinning in his grave. *> There is no well-defined theory of eternal inflation, so other worlds > from this source are purely speculative.* > There is a pretty well-defined theory of eternal inflation, there just is not any strong confirming observational evidence for it, at least not yet. But that is true of a lot of current cosmology and, with one exception, all quantum interpretations that attempt to make sense of the weird world of the quantum, including the vanilla Copenhagen Interpretation. The one exception is SUAC, the Shut Up And Calculate quantum interpretation. *> String theory and its "landscape" is a failed attempt at a physical > theory,* > That assessment is, I think, a little harsh, String Theory has already produced some interesting mathematics and maybe someday it will produce some interesting and testable physics too. But right now, as far as physics is concerned, it's not even a theory, it's an embryo theory, it's a theory for a theory. And after all there aren't a lot of alternative ideas for linking General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, Loop Quantum Gravity is the main competitor to String Theory but it hasn't been able to come up with anything physically testable either. > *> The quantum mechanical multiverse, arisong in the multi-worlds > interpretation, must necessarily involve the same physics as we observe. > And there is no reason to suppose that such worlds exist.* > If the human mind wishes to make sense of the weird quantum realm then those other worlds must exist, or at least that's true for my particular human mind. I don't deny the possibility that in the future somebody might come up with an idea even better than Everett's and doesn't need all those other worlds, but as of today there's not even a hint of such a superior interpretation. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> be8 -- 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/CAJPayv1BOohYez-L52U1ydUjrBu1%3D3AC4rWPKCZHgbQXQOi4Fw%40mail.gmail.com.
