[extropy-chat] Is Many Worlds testable?

Mike Dougherty msd001 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 30 20:03:56 UTC 2006

On 12/30/06, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> That is, the measurement paradox *started* the enquiry, but Everett
> looked for a solution that applied generally to a wholly quantum
> world. That, it seems to me, is why decoherence treats relevant
> interactions as de facto "measurements". But maybe that's as silly as
> saying the sun rises when we mean the earth dips toward it.

Doesn't an observer inside the universe they're trying to observe suffer
from just as much entaglement as the particles they're trying to describe?

How can any theory seek to explain the entire universe without regard for
Incompleteness? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incompleteness_theorem>

I sometimes wonder if quantum theory is really that much better than Flying
Spaghetti Monster <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster>-ism

(yes, I'm kidding... that's a joke, lighten up :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061230/a8487dfd/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list