These vacuum decays must involve energies that make it negligibly
possible for any human observers (out of 5x10^10) to survive -
otherwise they would have been observed already. That's one hell of a
bang - makes the KT event look like an afternoon tea party.
I suspect the anthropic principle keeps us out of such region of the
universe, in which case we're unlikely to see the SM parameters having
those values.
Cheers
Forwarded message:
> From everything-list-request.domain.name.hidden Wed Dec 9 00:11 EST 1998
> Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 04:57:11 -0800
> Message-Id: <C161B7880426D21198E30020484031ED1B8A44.domain.name.hidden>
> From: Higgo James <james.higgo.domain.name.hidden>
> To: "'Rainer Plaga'" <plaga.domain.name.hidden>
> Cc: "'avoid-l.domain.name.hidden'" <avoid-l.domain.name.hidden.edu>,
> "'everything-list.domain.name.hidden'" <everything-list.domain.name.hidden.com>
> Subject: RE: experiments and MWI
> Date: Tue, 8 Dec 1998 12:55:29 -0000
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
> Resent-Message-ID: <"I9yFK2.0.Lj2.c8IRs".domain.name.hidden>
> Resent-From: everything-list.domain.name.hidden
> X-Mailing-List: <everything-list.domain.name.hidden> archive/latest/176
> X-Loop: everything-list.domain.name.hidden
> Precedence: list
> Resent-Sender: everything-list-request.domain.name.hidden
> Content-Type: text/plain
> Content-Length: 3414
>
> Hi, Rainer.
>
> I am pleased to be in a universe in which your plane did not crash.
>
> On your first point, thanks - agreed. Also, Vic seems to imply that there
> are two types of system - quantum and non-quantum. A 'quantum effect' can
> make a difference to a hot, wet classical system. I have cc'd this to Vic
> Stenger's list.
>
> On point 2, I have to concede that you are right, and we must hope that an
> experiment such as the one you proposed could be undertaken to prove the
> valifity of MWI. That doesn't mean that the exploration of the consequences
> of MWI is not a useful pursuit here and now.
>
> On point 3, my quantum theory of immortality would make vacuum decays, no
> matter how common, imperceptible to us as we continue in those universes in
> which there has been no decay. This is an interesting avenue to pursue.
>
> James
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rainer Plaga [SMTP:plaga.domain.name.hidden]
> > Sent: 08 December 1998 12:29
> > To: james.higgo.domain.name.hidden
> > Subject: experiments and MWI
> >
> > Hello James,
> >
> > 1.
> > Vic's criticism seems justified in the
> > sense that you didn't prove immortality,
> > only extreme longevity seems very plausible.
> > On the other hand I do not understand his
> > point about mixtures. There are no
> > ``true mixtures'' in the MWI, only one
> > pure state of which we perceive a very small
> > part. So he seems to be outside
> > strict MWI with his argument.
> >
> > 2.
> > I thought about your point that
> > you don't need experimental evidence
> > in favor of MWI, that it's (undisputed) elegance
> > is sufficient.
> >
> > In the end I find this point of view
> > (which seems close to the one of Max)
> > sterile, it can hamper progress.
> >
> > Imagine people would have been content
> > in 1890 with the ``elegance'' of Boltzmann's
> > indirect thermodynamical evidence in favour
> > of atoms.
> > The wish to find direct evidence
> > in favor of single atoms was an important
> > driving force in the early days of quantum physics.
> >
> > In other words: I'm convinced that direct
> > evidence for MWI will lead to a qualitatively new
> > understanding of the quantum world.
> > I doubt that purely theoretical or philosophical
> > work on the MWI will ever lead to this, the
> > problems are too complicated.
> >
> > 3.
> > Counterexample to a theorem ``direct experimental evidence
> > against alternatives to the MWI'' can't be found
> > (like one Max seems to have in mind: ``Copenhagen
> > always leads to the same phenomenology'').
> >
> > There exist parameter regions in the Standard Model
> > of particle physics
> > where the vacuum is metastable. Single
> > quantum events, which raise the energy density
> > (e.g. particle collisions) then lead
> > to the decay of our vacuum to a more
> > stable form: this would kill humanity.
> >
> > Normally this is taken as evidence that
> > the SM does not have such parameters.
> > In the MWI this argument does not hold
> > of course. Each vacuum decay
> > has only a certain probability, so there
> > are always surviving humanities.
> > (This is very close to my ``atom bomb''
> > alteration of Max's suicide test of MWI).
> > In other words: if future research on the SM
> > would prove that the parameters are such
> > that the vacuum is metastable, this would
> > be direct (and non byzantine or
> > macabre) evidence for the MWI.
> >
> > Of course it might well be that such paramters are not found,
> > however any general theorem about the untestability of MWI
> > is doubtful.
> >
> > All the best Rainer
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Russell Standish Director
High Performance Computing Support Unit,
University of NSW Phone 9385 6967
Sydney 2052 Fax 9385 7123
Australia R.Standish.domain.name.hidden
Room 2075, Red Centre
http://parallel.hpc.unsw.edu.au/rks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tue Dec 08 1998 - 13:46:38 PST