On 1/16/2021 4:25 AM, Pierz Newton-John wrote:
On Sat, 16 Jan 2021 at 8:16 pm, 'scerir' via Everything List <everything-list@googlegroups.com <mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com>> wrote:Pierz wrote: "If you want to argue against the internal logic of MWI, you have to start by accepting what it proposes then proceeding to demonstrate how that leads to internal inconsistency." They show that MWI is inconsistent, in the Schroedinger picture. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00763476 <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF00763476>
That's behind a paywall. Can you post a copy? Brent
Well that argument at least demonstrates some understanding of MWI, unlike AG. But I don’t think it’s a good argument at all. Has the system M decohered and thus become entangled with M’ after M measures the spin? If so, then M and M’ are already on the same branch/ in the same world as one another and there is only one possible measurement M’ can make. The outcome is not subject to probability. If on the other hand, the system M has not decohered with the common environment of M’, then M remains in a superposition of up and down measurement states until measured by M’ and it does not make sense to say that either the electron or M itself are in a definite state with respect to M’. Both branches/ worlds exist and M’ has not yet split on the outcome. It’s a pretty basic point.
-- 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/d29e600e-2c25-0475-11cd-ba52c37a17aa%40verizon.net.
