Recent content by javisot

We have very powerful mathematics thanks to dealing with the finite and the infinite; it would be less powerful if we only treated the finite as a mathematical object. Fewer tools, less depth, less rigor, etc. (I have a question: in a context of "only finite mathematics" are incompleteness...

Spain vs Argentina in the final, as a Spaniard I obviously want Argentina to win.

I agree with your point and would add that if by "compatible" we mean being able to explain the same results, then MWI and Copenhagen are compatible. If by "compatible" we mean something more complex than simply being able to explain the same results, then MWI might not be compatible...

In string theory (M), are 10+1 dimensions "assumed" in the same way that 3+1 dimensions are assumed in GR? I understood that problems in string theory have solutions if and only if the problem is embedded in a spacetime with a specific number of dimensions. Unlike other theories where spacetime...

These are two very different views of chess. In one, you assume that there is a way to calculate "the next best move for you" given a certain distribution of pieces on the board, and given the classic rules and conditions of chess. The other view is that there is a "chess textbook" where all...

I've had a question for some time about the superposition of spacetime geometries. We have a quantum object in superposition; let's suppose that this quantum object has a certain spacetime geometry associated with it. Being in superposition, it has a superposition of geometries. Ultimately...

Barandés' interpretation does not offer the local explanation that we would so much like for any form of entanglement. (Sarcasm mode on)

A change to this paragraph: "we are always observers inside one branch, and from that perspective, it is operationally indistinguishable from Copenhagen." and, Copenhagen≠hidden variable

Perhaps the correct thing to do would be to start another specific thread about MWI with this comment, and have Peter Donis answer directly.

The individual experience of an observer in many worlds is indistinguishable from Copenhagen.

Didn't you say that after message 27 we couldn't talk about this anymore and that everything had already been said?

The problem with the bubble isn't just that AI has been oversold (which too); it's that they're essentially selling the concept of AGI before it even exists. The bigger the bubble, the worse the consequences will be if it bursts. The question is, how might the bursting of the AI/AGI bubble...

What is the point of saying that MWI is falsified while Copenhagen is not? These interpretations correspond in the sense that they can explain the same experimental results. In this sense, MWI is like an analytical extension of Copenhagen (I'm speaking in an analogous sense).

Have you tried IA? You should ask it to critique your idea. It's true that if you ask it to help you create an absurd theory, it will, but if you ask it to find flaws and criticisms in your theories, it will do that too.

Because, in some contexts, a black hole is also treated as a quantum system with S degrees of freedom, where S is proportional to the area of the event horizon.