From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Fri Feb 14 2003 - 07:40:25 MST
Anders wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 04:24:37PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote:
>>
>> But wait! Here's this great swathe of possible paths, all of them
>> taken, each of them the trajectory native to its own idiosyncratic
>> world--but what *we* *here* experience is (almost) always that one
>> goddam minimal action path. This looks wildly inconsistent with MW
>> to me. (Of course it might be that in the MW manifold there is an a
>> priori high p value for the least action path, so any observer is
>> almost always in such a world--but that just establishes by fiat
>> what is meant to be explained.
>
> My current late evening impression is that the worlds where you see a
> non-classical behavior have measure zero - i.e. are never experienced.
>
> Hmm, I *thought* I understood it, but
> http://neon.airtime.co.uk/users/station/m-worlds.htm#Q23
> suggests I might have been wrong. I need to think about this more.
### Worlds with non-classical behavior have measure zero at infinity - if I
understand it correctly, it means that if you wait long enough, any chain of
lottery winnings will end, but any finite chain of events has a non-zero
measure.
Correct?
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Feb 14 2003 - 08:25:19 MST