On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 12:54:45 AM UTC+2 Brent wrote: > It's not that it's necessarily 50/50; it's that there's no mechanism for > it being the values in the Schroedinger equation. In one world A happens. > In the other world B happens. How does, for example, a 16:9 ratio get > implemented. > For example, A happens in 16 worlds and B in 9 worlds. Or in general, the proportion of worlds where A happens to worlds where B happens is 16/9.
> There's nothing in Schroedinger's equation that assigns one of those > numbers to one world or the other. You can just make it an axiom. Or > equivalently, if you can show these are odds ratios, you can invoke > Gleason's theorem as the only consistent probability measure. But all that > is extra stuff that MWI claims to avoid by just being pure Schroedinger > equation evolution. > In MWI the odds of being in a particular world depend on the counting of branches, similarly like the odds of selecting a particular ball from a basket depend on the counting of balls. But if there are infinitely many branches in MWI, different ways of counting give different probabilities, which means there are different possible probability measures, and so MWI needs an additional axiom that specifies the measure and thus the way of counting the branches. You say that the only possible (consistent) measure is the Born rule; in that case no additional axiom about the measure is needed (beyond the axiom of consistency, which goes without saying) and the branches must be counted in such a way that the probabilities result in the Born rule. -- 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/ea83ab1b-e3cc-4ef8-be8d-02d59e1722a7n%40googlegroups.com.
