Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: QM and Multiple Worlds
Message-ID: <705@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 15-Aug-85 03:41:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.705
Posted: Thu Aug 15 03:41:29 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 19-Aug-85 06:07:49 EDT
References: <486@talcott.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 16

> The 'multiple worlds interpretation' of QM is not a physical theory:
> you cannot design an experiment to disprove it, since it postulates that
> there is not interaction between its different worlds.

The multiple-worlds theory was proposed (by Everett and Wheeler, as I
recall) as an alternative to conventional (Copenhagen) quantum theory.
It was later shown to make exactly the same predictions.  For this
reason, it seems to have fallen into neglect.  There IS an interaction
between the multiple worlds in this theory; but it is just the forward
branching process, which is of course inherently probabilistic.

"The world" as normally used in conversation actually would encompass
the knowable past of our particular slice and all possible futures,
i.e. an infinite number of the other "multiple world" slices.  It is
unfortunate that "world" has these two different meanings when
discussing this theory.  It certainly is confusing.