On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 3:08 PM Quentin Anciaux <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Bruce, > > If we consider that there is always an infinite superposition of branches, > then each partition also contains an infinite number of branches, but with > different relative measures. The key point is that branches are not > discrete objects—they are coarse-grained regions of the wavefunction shaped > by decoherence. > > Unitary evolution does not create additional observers explicitly, but if > measure reflects the density of observer instances within the wavefunction, > then the number of observers experiencing a particular sequence is not > uniform across all branches. This avoids naive branch counting and aligns > with how probabilities emerge from continuous distributions rather than > discrete events. > > The challenge is formalizing this within unitary QM, possibly through > information-theoretic approaches, measure theory, or even constraints from > computational complexity. If amplitudes guide the structure of the > wavefunction, why wouldn’t they also influence the distribution of observer > instances? > It is good to see that you finally acknowledge that your theory is not quantum mechanics. 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/CAFxXSLQFwbLsMpfBiohtnoR8dEY7Mfn%3DjaTC0_8nqOnwdgPBMQ%40mail.gmail.com.
