On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 6:23:10 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 24 Sep 2019, at 10:22, Philip Thrift <cloud...@gmail.com <javascript:>> > wrote: > > > > On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 3:05:39 AM UTC-5, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, September 24, 2019 at 1:36:42 AM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 8:44:39 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 9/23/2019 6:24 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Monday, September 23, 2019 at 3:44:49 PM UTC-6, Brent wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9/23/2019 11:59 AM, Philip Thrift wrote: >>>>> >>>>> *But other quantum experts use decoherence to explain quantum >>>>> phenomena without invoking multiple universes.* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Without invoking" doesn't mean "denying". >>>>> >>>> >>>> It does if you believe in applying Occam's Razor. AG >>>> >>>> >>>> True. But I'm still waiting for pt to quote this expert saying he >>>> explains quantum phenomena without MW. He keeps implying it's Zurek, but >>>> I >>>> just read Zurek's paper on quantum Darwinism again and ISTM Zurek is >>>> assuming MWI throughout. QD is just his solution to the basis problem. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> Zurek is not on a book tour, nor does he tweet, but after the rollout of >>> Carroll's book, one can only conclude: >>> >>> * Many Worlds is religion, not science.* >>> >>> @philipthrift >>> >> >> Right. You'll notice how my comment that the MWI is tantamount to >> "hubris on steroids" was never responded to. Hopefully, he'll be denied >> tenure, and his book and personage can go into the dustbin of history, >> where it belongs. AG >> > > > > I can't believe (well, I guess I can believe) the number of physicist who > think MWI is a valuable contribution to science. If you tell them > otherwise they they you that you don't understand physics. Many Worlds is > "in the math" (as Sean Carroll claims) so it must be true. > > They engage in magical thinking, but think they are doing science. Amazing. > > > The many-histories is a logical consequence of the theory. To assume a > theory without accepting its consequence is just wrong, or irrational. > > Bruno > > > > Which specific theory formulation are you talking about?
There's *quantum measure theory*: Axioms in section 2: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1002.0589.pdf But I don't see where Many Worlds as Carroll presents them are necessarily implied by these axioms. @philipthrift -- 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/d3cd0dab-58b7-4c1e-893f-f9c7821f9735%40googlegroups.com.
