Hal Finney wrote:
It's something of a semantic difference whether worlds should be
said
to fuse in the MWIOne way of describing it is to say that there
are two worlds, one where the photon passes through one slit and one where
it passes through the
other. Then the worlds fuse when the photon
In a message dated 99-06-11 04:19:52 EDT, you write:
<<
It's James. And that's a difficult one: can our present have many pasts? My
feeling is yes, but QM seems to say no, as I understand it. However the
solution may be in realising that there is not neceserily ONE present: there
may be many
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> It's something of a semantic difference whether worlds should be said
> to fuse in the MWI.
Maybe, but you might also say that it's a semantic difference to
say that they split. I'm saying that, if you allow that they split,
then, in the same sense, they also fuse.
It's something of a semantic difference whether worlds should be said
to fuse in the MWI.
Consider a photon which passes through a two slit interference experiment.
One way of describing it is to say that there are two worlds, one where
the photon passes through one slit and one where it passes
It's James. And that's a difficult one: can our present have many pasts? My
feeling is yes, but QM seems to say no, as I understand it. However the
solution may be in realising that there is not neceserily ONE present: there
may be many identical presents, each with slightly different pasts, but
i
5 matches
Mail list logo
