On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 6:07 PM Bruce Kellett <[email protected]> wrote:
*> But we know for a fact that the laws of physics as we know them today > are not correct.* True, the laws of physics as we know them break down at the centers of Black Holes and at the instant of the Big Bang, but they're the best thing we have right now and they seem to insist very strongly that many worlds do exist. And there is absolutely no reason to think that when we find them the new improved laws of physics will rule out many worlds rather than provide even more evidence that they exist. *> Lots of things are put into physics in an ad hoc way. The Born rule is a > prime example -- it is just* > *imposed on the quantum wave function in an ad hoc way -- it cannot be > derived from the fundamental theory.* > You've got it backwards. The Born Rule does NOT need theory to justify itself, instead theory needs The Born Rule to justify itself because we know from experiment that The Born Rule is correct. If there is a conflict between The Born Rule and theory then The Born Rule wins and the theory must be discarded. * > Who said we need a probability measure?* *Experiment* is the one that says we need a probability measure when we get into the quantum realm, and in science, theory must always take a backseat. Experiment and observation is always the boss, theory never is. John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis> eib myh -- 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/CAJPayv3ZpZV4K5jewEhr1JAzafQW7vAVD_aPWgaWZWwmi3FE3w%40mail.gmail.com.
