On 5/4/2022 12:27 PM, smitra wrote:

In fact, that idea introduces a raft of problems of its own -- what is the measure over this infinity of branches? What does it mean to partition infinity in the ratio of 0.9:0.1? What is the mechanism (necessarily outside the Schrodinger equation) that achieves this?That simply means that there is as of yet no good model for QM withoutthe Born rule.

`But there is no mechanism for the Born rule. It is inconsistent with`

`pure Schroedinger evolution of the wave function. I think the problem`

`of measures on infinity is overcome if you simply postulate a very large`

`but finite number of branches to split. Or why not not an continuum`

`probability and just measure by the density around the eigenvalue...the`

`measured values are never exact anyway. I don't these things are wrong`

`or show MWI is inconsistent, but I think they show it has just moved the`

`problems it purported to solve off to some unobservable worlds, which is`

`no better than CI.`

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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/24e759f9-cf72-8439-a8e7-cf3fc63cd2b7%40gmail.com.