From: Patrick Crenshaw (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Dec 12 2004 - 04:34:11 MST
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 <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> 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.
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 : Sun May 19 2013 - 04:01:09 MDT