<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Adrian Tymes </span><span dir="ltr" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><<a href="mailto:atymes@gmail.com" target="_blank">atymes@gmail.com</a>></span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> wrote:</span><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>As is the theory that the other parts of the superposition were real<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>and continue to exist forever, just somehow shifting to some other<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>"world" that did not exist before that moment.  QM contains no<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>provision for any of that.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​</div><font size="4">On the contrary, if you assume Schrodinger's<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>Wave Equation means what it says then it does indeed exist forever, the mathematics say nothing about it collapsing. MWI unquestionably makes the fewest assumptions, everybody assumes the<br>Schrodinger<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>Wave Equation (or the equivalent Heisenberg Matrices) is correct but in addition<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>Copenhagen assumes the act of observation does mysterious things<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>even<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>though it can't say exactly<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>(or even approximately)<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>what a measurement is.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>And<br>Pilot Wave assumes a thing that can not be directly measured somehow guides things around almost like the finger of God.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>And<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>Transactional assumes the future can <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​change​</div> the past.<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>But MWI assumes none of that, all MWI assumes is<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>Schrodinger's<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>Wave Equation and Heisenberg Matrices<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>mean what they say<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>the<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​y​</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>mean. That's it. Paul Davies<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>describes<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>MWI as being "cheap on assumptions, but<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>expensive on universes".</font></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"></blockquote><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​> ​</div>superdeterminism is not necessarily<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​ ​</div>incompatible with free will<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">​<font size="4">Tell me what "free will" means and I'll tell you if I agree.​</font></div><font size="4"> </font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><font size="4">​John K Clark​</font></div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>