On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 3:08 PM Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Bruce, > > If we consider that there is always an infinite superposition of branches, > then each partition also contains an infinite number of branches, but with > different relative measures. The key point is that branches are not > discrete objects—they are coarse-grained regions of the wavefunction shaped > by decoherence. > > Unitary evolution does not create additional observers explicitly, but if > measure reflects the density of observer instances within the wavefunction, > then the number of observers experiencing a particular sequence is not > uniform across all branches. This avoids naive branch counting and aligns > with how probabilities emerge from continuous distributions rather than > discrete events. > > The challenge is formalizing this within unitary QM, possibly through > information-theoretic approaches, measure theory, or even constraints from > computational complexity. If amplitudes guide the structure of the > wavefunction, why wouldn’t they also influence the distribution of observer > instances? > It is good to see that you finally acknowledge that your theory is not quantum mechanics. Bruce -- 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/CAFxXSLQFwbLsMpfBiohtnoR8dEY7Mfn%3DjaTC0_8nqOnwdgPBMQ%40mail.gmail.com.
