On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 5:57 PM Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
> Bruce, > > You argue that MWI predicts a uniform distribution of outcomes because all > sequences exist and each branch contains exactly one observer. Since > experiments follow the Born rule instead, you claim MWI is falsified. But > this assumes that measure has no effect—something you have not proven. > > The fact that 2^N sequences exist does not mean they all contribute > equally to an observer’s experience. That’s the core issue. If measure > determines how many copies of an observer exist in different branches, then > high-measure branches dominate experience. This would naturally lead to > Born-rule frequencies, without contradicting experiment. > > Simply stating that each branch contains "one observer" and that measure > is irrelevant does not prove MWI is falsified—it assumes your conclusion. > If you want to show MWI is incompatible with experiment, you need more than > just claiming that measure plays no role; you need to justify why quantum > experiments consistently match despite your assertion that all sequences > should be equally likely. > The fact is that you get the same 2^N binary sequences from the binary state |psi> = a|0> + b|1> whatever the values of a and b. My case is proven. Bruce -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLQGGNQZnr8JkO5h8fGVAETWsk2fheYpH8ruSr8N7GNXhQ%40mail.gmail.com.
