On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 2:20 PM 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List < everything-list@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> *Part of the dislike of the MWI is that its proponents assume a purity > that is not an evident virtue of the intepretation. For example, > interpreting the squared amplitudes as probabilities seems to be assumed,* > It's not assumed its concluded based on overwhelming experimental evidence and the fact that Gleason's theorem tells us that in 3 spatial dimensions the Born Rule is the only way probability can be unitary. > *> If you ask "probabilities of what?" in MWI the answer can't be > probability of existing because MWI has committed to all solutions* > But it can be the probability that something similar to me as I am right now will see Moscow in one second, I say "similar" because the me that might see Moscow in one second would not be exactly the same as the me of right now because that me would see Moscow and I don't right now. *> So it becomes probability of finding yourself in a particular > world...which depends on a theory of consciousness * > I'll be damned if i can see what consciousness has to do with it. The Born rule would also give the probability a film camera with a automatic one second timer will take a picture that when developed will turn out to be a picture of Moscow. John K Clark -- 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/CAJPayv0hBpH%2BCi2iaQfDm0V468378tZdkxYMv3xodd%3DHnPfo1Q%40mail.gmail.com.
