Everett's MWI versus DeWitt's MWI

[jbergman]

TL;DR Summary

Looking for references on the differences between Everett's version of MWI and the more popular version of DeWitt

I've read from various sources that Everett's original version of the MWI is different than the current popular account of MWI which I believe is more due to DeWitt. Specifically, Everett's initial interpretation placed less emphasis on the reality of the branching universes.

I haven't found a good account that discusses these differences and the history of the MWI in depth. I am wondering if a) I am correct that Everett's views were different from his subsequent contemporaries and b) if there are any good references other than Everett's original thesis that discuss this in depth.

 

[Halc]

Summary:: Looking for references on the differences between Everett's version of MWI and the more popular version of DeWitt

I've read from various sources that Everett's original version of the MWI is different than the current popular account of MWI which I believe is more due to DeWitt. Specifically, Everett's initial interpretation placed less emphasis on the reality of the branching universes.

Under MWI, there is but the one universe, and it is real. DeWitt coined 'MWI' and probably dragged the interpretation out of obscurity, but nobody suggests that there is some kind of metaphysically new thing created, especially one that is less real than the one we observe.

if there are any good references other than Everett's original thesis that discuss this in depth.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9709032.pdf which is ref 4 on wiki

 

[jbergman]

I found a good overview at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-everett/ that goes in depth into Everett's Interpretation and contrasts it with the later interpretation popularized by DeWitt. In particular, as a first approximation, Everett doesn't suggest a splitting of worlds whereas DeWitt does.

 

[Halc]

In particular, as a first approximation, Everett doesn't suggest a splitting of worlds whereas DeWitt does.

This was discussed in a prior topic, posts 7-10:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/sean-carroll-and-many-worlds.991607/post-6370735
@PeterDonis explained how DeWitt's peer reviewed literature on the subject (as opposed to his initial submissions) does not differ substantially from Everett's.