On 7/11/05, Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't see how the multi-world or multiverse model is more > conservative than Bohm's idea, though. It sounds considerably more > complex and requires a hell of a lot more effort to make it happen. An > entire universe at each decision node? For every possible decision > ever? This seems more pragmatic than suggesting a particle/probability > wave mix? > > Of course I don't have the background in QM to judge, but I do have an > idea about concepts like simplicity, elegance and so on, and the > multiverse model is certainly not any of those things. > > > -- > Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books
The MW can be simpler than the others because, it is simpler to specify all the possible worlds than to give all the information which uniquely specifies one solitary world out of the 10^90 or whatever possible number. You could think of it in Unix terms as: * instead of: foobar.txt Or as: ER (all real numbers) rather than random gargantuan number: 189458735487234768934593875754645647842231445... ~Maru _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
