>in order to explain the remarkable rise in evolutionary complexity, he calls
>on quantum uncertainty and talks about quantum collapse/multiple universes.
If there really are multiple universes then you don't need to explain why things collapse
because nothing does. You don't have to explain what an observation or an observer is
either, that's the big advantage of the many world theory, although some think the
epistemological price paid for it is too high. As for me, on Monday, Wednesday and
Friday I'm a believer, on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday I'm not, and on Sunday
I'm a agnostic.
>But what he has completely failed to do is provide the slightest reason
>*why* the quantum field should collapse on an outcome that is evolutionarily
If there is an infinite number of world's conducive to the evolution of intelligent
life and a infinite number that is not then there is an obvious explanation of why
our own particular world happens to be a member of the first group.
John K Clark email@example.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:04:27 MDT