On 11/17/2024 2:29 PM, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 03:52:25PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 3:28 PM Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 03:08:03PM +1100, Bruce Kellett wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 2:41 PM Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au>
wrote:
>
> I don't think it requires this assumption. In fact "physically real"
> is a rather nebulous concept anyway.
>
>
> If you want the 'other worlds' to be physically real, then the original
wave
> function must be physically real.
That's a non-sequitur. The 'other worlds' are as real as this one. The
reality of the wave function doesn't enter into it.
It does if the wave function is purely epistemic. In other words, if it is
merely a means of calculating probabilities, then the supposed 'other worlds'
do not exist. The probabilities are the probability that one, and only one,
outcome is realized for each experiment.
You've lost me here. Even if the wf is epistemic, it has no bearing on
whether other branches are as real as this one or not.
The MWI states that all branches are equally real. Other
interpretations assert that only one branch is real, because... (fill
in the blanks).
And a the epistemic interpretation says that there are no branches,
there are just calculations of probabilities of what the world will be
like in the future.
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 visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/235c8ac4-ba74-4a3a-9500-7f6ea07bb748%40gmail.com.
