Re: A thought on MWI and its alternative(s)

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: > On 11/06/2017 1:31 am, Telmo Menezes wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 1:11 AM, Bruce Kellett >> wrote: >>> >>> On 10/06/2017 2:36 am, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Fri, Jun 9,

Re: A thought on MWI and its alternative(s)

You seem to be taking the older view of many worlds that is favoured by David Deutsch. This approach has serious problems with the notorious basis problem, and there does not seem to be any principled way from within the theory to select unambiguosly the basis in which all of these worlds

Re: A thought on MWI and its alternative(s)

6/13/2017 4:11 AM, Telmo Menezes wrote: The reason why it would follow is precisely the point of my rhetorical question above. If you take the wave function seriously, then you take seriously that qubits really do exist in a superposition of states, and this explains the exponential increase in

Re: A thought on MWI and its alternative(s)

On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 8:32 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: ​>> ​ >> ​I agree Interference must take place in a single world, but where did >> all the information that produced the interference come from, where did the >> computations that produced all those wrong answers

Re: A thought on MWI and its alternative(s)

On 13/06/2017 9:11 pm, Telmo Menezes wrote: On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:43 AM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 11/06/2017 1:31 am, Telmo Menezes wrote: I think you built a straw man and now you're attacking it. When I heard Deutsch make the argument, he was referring

Re: A thought on MWI and its alternative(s)

On 11 Jun 2017, at 19:07, David Nyman wrote: On 11 Jun 2017 16:44, "Bruno Marchal" wrote: On 11 Jun 2017, at 12:24, David Nyman wrote: On 11 June 2017 at 10:14, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 09 Jun 2017, at 20:21, David Nyman wrote: On 9 June 2017 at