nichomachus wrote:
> On Apr 19, 11:51 am, "Telmo Menezes" <te....domain.name.hidden> wrote:
>>> Those branches exist even if the experiment is not set
>>> up. This follows necessarily from the MWI. Pick any date in history
>>> that you like. There must exist fluke branches that have experienced
>>> unlikely histories since that time. The example I mentioned previously
>>> was no atomic decay since January 1, 1900.
>> Yes I agree. The second law is just a statistical property, is it not?
>> I believe it is possible to observe cases where the second law does
>> not hold, even for a long time. But it's extremely unlikely. That
>> being said, I would argue that it would be nice if we could come to
>> the conclusion that the quantum suicider experiment can work even
>> without the need to resort to an highly unlikely stacking of quantum
>> choices.
>
> How would it work? The point of the suicider experiement is that the
> suicider is able to prove to himself the reality of MWI by forcing
> himself to experience only an absurdly low probability set of events.
> Thus, he demonstrates to the few versions of himself who remain the
> existence of fluke branches, and by extension the truth of the MWI.
>
> Right, I agree that a universe in which entropy decreases
> monotonically would be unlikely since it would only happen in those
> exceedingly rare fluke branches.
If it were also expanding in spacetime it would be exactly like our universe.
Brent Meeker
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list.domain.name.hidden
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list-unsubscribe.domain.name.hidden
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Received on Sat Apr 19 2008 - 17:26:32 PDT