arunma said:Uh, I think you might be talking about the "many worlds theory." But this isn't really a legitimate physics theory (in science a theory is a model that's been verified by numerous experiments). Honestly I never even learned about it in physics classes, I only know about it from popular literature, sci-fi, etc.
To me it sounds more like a psychic on karma than a physicist on the many-worlds interpretation.CloIV said:what is the theory that most physicists
believe that the decisions that we didn't make
we live them on another life?
Loren Booda said:The many-worlds theory is supposed to be consistent with other, more accepted quantum theories, but may have the advantage of continuity of reality, e.g., no wavefunction collapse, however at the expense of accumulating extreme intricacy.
Every measurement you make would be a choice between two universes, say one where an observed electron has spin up, and the other spin down. The number (n) of universes increases geometrically with the number of measurements (m), roughly:
2m=n.
arunma said:Something just occurred to me. You'd only get two universes when the Hilbert space is finite-dimensional. When your wavefunction exists in function space and can be decomposed into an infinite number of Fourier terms, you would literally get an infinite number of universes from making the measurement.
The "Theory that most physicists believe that the decision" is a theory in physics that states that the outcome of a physical event is determined by a combination of random chance and predetermined factors. This theory is often used to explain the behavior of subatomic particles and complex systems.
This theory differs from other theories in physics because it allows for both random chance and predetermined factors to influence the outcome of a physical event. Other theories may only consider one or the other, but this theory takes both into account.
There is a wide range of evidence that supports this theory, including experiments in quantum mechanics and observations of complex systems. In these cases, the behavior of particles and systems cannot be predicted with complete certainty, but the probabilities of different outcomes can be calculated using this theory.
Yes, there are some criticisms of this theory. Some scientists argue that it cannot fully explain certain phenomena, such as the behavior of black holes. Others argue that it is too complex and relies too heavily on probability rather than concrete cause-and-effect relationships.
This theory has a significant impact on our understanding of the universe because it provides a framework for explaining the behavior of particles and systems that was previously not well understood. It also raises philosophical questions about determinism and free will, as well as the role of chance in the universe.