parallel demensions

[wunderkind]

Is it possible for there to be other planes or demensions paralell (or not paralell) to ours? If so, are they infinate in number, or what? If any one has any information on this subject, I would greatly appreciate it!

[selfAdjoint]

In the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, a new world branches off every time conventional QM has a "wave collapse" or in other words whenever the wave function produces a set of definite values. Then according to MWI, the wave does not collapse but the world splits so that each value has its own stream. In this case there would be an enormous number of separate worldstreams, but not infinite.

Some physicists believe in the many worlds interpretation, but not very many. But AFAIK no one has ever refuted it.

[Bob3141592]

Originally posted by selfAdjoint
Some physicists believe in the many worlds interpretation, but not very many. But AFAIK no one has ever refuted it.

How could they possibly refute it? It strikes me a lot like tachyons--something that can in principle have no contact with ot influence on our universe. In that case, one way or another, what would it matter?

BTW, I'm new here. I cut out some of the previous post in my quotation to save space. Is that kind of selective quoting considered impolite here?

[selfAdjoint]

Selective quoting is fine. It might be nice, but not necessary if when you cut something out of the middle of a quoted text, you put some dahes or the word snip, or something to indicate the gap.

[wunderkind]

Thanks for the info. I appreciated it!

[LURCH]

Originally posted by Bob3141592
How could they possibly refute it? It strikes me a lot like tachyons--something that can in principle have no contact with ot influence on our universe. In that case, one way or another, what would it matter?

Which is exactly why I cannot accept the MWI myself. One of the cardinal rules of the Everett Interpretation is that events in one universe can have no effect on another. This may make ti impossible to refute the MWI, but it automatically refutes all evidence used to support it. Many Worlds was proposed to explain phenomina observed in the lab, yet it states that no phenominon supporting the View could be observed. Ergo, no evidence that has been observed can be in support of the MWI.

[notwithstanding]

Originally posted by selfAdjoint

Some physicists believe in the many worlds interpretation, but not very many. But AFAIK no one has ever refuted it.

Au con-trair French is not my first language, in fact it isn't even my 40th.

[Nereid]

AFAIK = as far as I know? Hmm, doesn't seem French to me [g)]

Why is it that few people on PF (other than Monique) seem to casually drop Hindi, or Thai, or Chinese, or Japanese, or Bahasa references into their posts?