Comment by Dave4 on Many Worlds, One Best Guess · 2008-06-28T07:04:36.000Z · LW · GW

Please save your breathe, don't even try to say "NONO Many worlds is the REALIST" approach to QM. That's bohm, he came 3 years before Everett, he saved realism in QM. Actually no, de Broglie did in the early 1920's.

Read Travis Norsen's article in Foundation of Physics: "Against realism". It'll show you just HOW deluded MW proponents claim they are.

You can find it on arxivs I think

Comment by Dave4 on Many Worlds, One Best Guess · 2008-06-28T07:02:03.000Z · LW · GW

Only if Many worlds is assumed true, yeah, cause then EVERY possibility is true. Like right now in this universe you read this post. In another you have intercourse with your neighbours dog. In another your hair just fell off. EVERY physical possibility being true = not science = cop out = end of science.

Anyway, MWI is inconsistent with all forms of realism so it's a incoherent hypothesis.

Comment by Dave4 on Many Worlds, One Best Guess · 2008-06-27T10:18:27.000Z · LW · GW

Many worlds is far from obviously true. The only logical stand point is single universe, there's no evidence against it or even suggesting ANYTHING else.

Bohm is probably the correct one, and has been since 1926, before even Copenhagen was made up.

If your such a MWI believer, realize it's self refuting faith. In MWI all the atoms making up your brain would be in many universes made to believe it was right while it was wrong.