# Re: The multiverse is unscientific nonsense??

```
On 11/26/2023 6:54 PM, Jason Resch wrote:
```
```

```
On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 8:07 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote:
```
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 9:55 AM John Clark <johnkcl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 5:35 PM Bruce Kellett
<bhkellet...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> /and how do they instantiate the probabilities
that we measure.
/

>> There is one observer for every quantum state
Schrodinger's cat is in.

/>That is exactly the problem. That would suggest that the
two outcomes (dead or alive) are equally likely. But it
can easily be arranged that one outcome is more probable
than the other. MWI cannot account for unequal probabilities./

There are a googolplex number of Bruce Kelletts, all of which
are in very slightly different quantum states but they all
observe that, although Schrodinger's cat is in slightly
different quantum states, the cat is alive in all of them. And
there are 3 googolplexes of Bruce Kelletts, all of which are
in very slightly different quantum states but they all observe
that, although Schrodinger's cat is in slightly different
quantum states, the cat is dead in all of them. Therefore if
Bruce Kellett had no other information than before he opened
the box he would bet that there is only one chance in four he
would see an alive cat when the box was opened.

Nonsense. Where did the 3:1 ratio come from? I know the decay rate
of the radioactive source. I can arrange to open the box when
there is only a 10% chance that the atom has decayed. In that case
I clearly have a 90% chance of seeing a live cat when I open the
box. Similarly, I can arrange for any probability between zero and
one of seeing a live cat. Whereas, if there is always a live cat
branch and a dead cat branch, my probability of seeing a live cat
is always 50%, contrary to the laws of radioactive decay.

```
The time the decay occurs is roughly continuous over the hour of the experiment. Thus the dead cat will have been dead for a random period between 0 and 1 hours from the time it entered the box. You will find the observed temperature of the cat will be a continuous variable correlated to the time of the decay, and this requires an infinity of possible observers.
That seems to entail other problems.  1/3 of infinity is the same size as infinity.
```
Brent
```
```
Jason
--
```
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/CA%2BBCJUgtYO0DDpC-yd2N-Fxs4G8jvaUdbYMiQZLq%3DeLUAFynFA%40mail.gmail.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CA%2BBCJUgtYO0DDpC-yd2N-Fxs4G8jvaUdbYMiQZLq%3DeLUAFynFA%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 view this discussion on the web visit