> On 16 Sep 2019, at 02:46, spudboy100 via Everything List > <everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote: > > My guess is among the physics community, most, would be mildly, skeptical of > MWI, because it's a bridge too far to get evidence of, as yet and thus, > unconcerned.
Hmm… I will criticise this on two levels. 1) there are evidence: Nature loves to multiply things, and each time we said that we know what our universe is, we get later that it was multiple. We have believe that Earth was the world, then that the solar system was the world, then that the galaxy was the world, then thanks to Hubble the guy, we eventually accept what Kant did suggest, that our galaxies are themselves multiple, and now we see them like little bacteria engulfed in filaments made of a mysterious matter, along with an observable matter no less mysterious as it implies a still bigger multiplication. 2) Occam Razor. If you can explain everything with the axiom A and without the axiom B, get rid of axiom B, especially if it put some mess in your theory. The theory Mechanism + SWE is simply much more conceptually simple than the theory SWE + an ontological physical collapse of on ontological physical wave (without mentioning the dualism in the implicit theory of mind). Only one problem, for Mechanism to work, and notably to get the qualia extending the quanta (like G* extend G, or Z1* extends Z1), we need to re-prove constructively that Mechanism -> SWE, but there are promising result (I dare to say) in that direction. Yes, the less axioms you have, the more possibilities/models you get, and with mechanism, there is a simple explanation why the possibilities have to interfere at some point. The most plausible theory is Mechanism. You need only to believe in 2+2=4 & Co. The appearance of the many worlds and they laws is explained from that, and in a precise way so that it can be tested, and thanks to QM, it works, and it explains the relation between qualia and quanta, consciousness and matter, etc. Maybe wrongly, but that has to be shown. There are zero universe, also. So we get the conceptual Occam (smaller theory) and the ontological Occam, no physical universe at all, but a universal dreamer (the universal machine lost in an incredible web of dreams, some coherent up to make it able to say “hello” to itself, and develop infinite conversations, like bacteria ... > Having said this, many cosmologists are still having a cat fight about the > Hubble Constant (The rate of cosmological expansion). my suspicion is, that > once we get to the point of hanging truly gigantic telescopes on the > periphery of the solar system, new discoveries will be made, and revisions to > old laws of physics will be done. We'll gain a few definitive answers through > observation, and we shall see that quantum in action at a vastly large scale. > Relatedly, hey!, where's my dark matter? in fact, hey!, where's my fusion > reactors. Ah! So much for the 'mentally fit' physicists and astronomers…. Nothing is simple. Not even Nothing. Bruno > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Thrift <cloudver...@gmail.com> > To: Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com> > Sent: Sun, Sep 15, 2019 7:03 pm > Subject: Re: Another physicist in mental decline (Sean Carroll) > > > > On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 5:46:13 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > On Sunday, September 15, 2019 at 3:34:10 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > Sean Carroll's many-selves > > And the good news is ... the one in this world is going bald. AG > > > And (many would say) going crazy. > > There is obviously (in his view) a world where a Sean Carroll is a "one > world" quantum theorist. > > > @philipthrift > > > > > https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=zsXCwUsuvKo > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsXCwUsuvKo> > > > > @philipthrift > > On Wednesday, September 11, 2019 at 11:45:41 PM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: > https://www.wired.com/story/ sean-carroll-thinks-we-all- > exist-on-multiple-worlds/ > <https://www.wired.com/story/sean-carroll-thinks-we-all-exist-on-multiple-worlds/> > -- > 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 > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/3b7a3a0d-b3e0-43ef-b886-c393eb35c9b0%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/3b7a3a0d-b3e0-43ef-b886-c393eb35c9b0%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > -- > 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 > <mailto:everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8643456.7738728.1568594779723%40mail.yahoo.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8643456.7738728.1568594779723%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. -- 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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/DDAE2632-6951-443B-B64F-C15D92BD2C26%40ulb.ac.be.
