From: Patrick Crenshaw (patrick.crenshaw@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Dec 12 2004 - 04:34:11 MST
Marc,
I have a degree in physics, and I can tell you that there is no
*observable* difference between many-worlds and any other
interpretation. As far as I know, the only thing that we can observe a
difference between is local hidden variable theories and quantum
mechanics. Google: "Bell's inequality"
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:52:28 +1300 (NZDT), Marc Geddes <marc_geddes@yahoo.co.nz>
> I think that skepticism about MWI comes from a
> misunderstanding about what science actually is.
>
> Skeptics tend to regard science as simply a practical
> tool for manipulating the world, rather than a method
> of *explanation*
>
> MWI is not "a philosophical solution looking for a
> problem", it's a metaphysical *conclusion* based on
> what our best current theories of the world (QM) are
> telling us. The mathematics of QM is *telling us*
> that multiple alternative outcomes co-exist with each
> other. Since QM makes correct predictions about
> things that we *can* observe, there is good and
> sufficient reason for trusting it on the things we
> can't directly observe.
I would suggest that you stop reading popular books about physics and
move on to something like Sakurai.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0201539292/qid=1102850908/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/002-2999111-5568046?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
Popular books tend to shroud things in nonsense because they aren't
allowed to use equations.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:22:50 MST