What is the significance of Tim Palmer's Invariant Set Postulate?

[Fyzix]

What do people here think about Tim Palmer's Invariant Set Postulate?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invariant_set_postulate

http://nanominded.com/2011/03/23/linking-two-passions-quantum-mechanics-and-fractals/

 

[TGlad]

Personally I think it is correct:
Comparing three options for why quantum events appear random:
1. They just are random, nature has a little random number generator - Quantum theory
2. Every event splits the universe into multiple, we exist on an arbitrary one - Many worlds
3. The laws of physics as applied to the entire state of the universe (at all times) has converged on a steady state, each different event outcome corresponds to a different aeon, i.e. on a different cycle of the universe, which is very close but different. Not every outcome is part of this steady state - Invariant set

Note that we can use the words steady and invariant to describe our dynamic and changing universe because we are including time our universe description. i.e. The set of all objects at all points in time has converged on a self-consistent, unvarying set.

To me it is exceedingly more likely that our universe is an invariant set than not. Just as it is exceedingly more likely that a civilisation finds itself on an orbiting planet than on a planet heading towards or away from its sun. Just as it is more likely that we're in a spinning galaxy, and that strawberries have seeds. These are all equilibriums/steady states/invariant sets to one degree or another.

Another thing about an invariant set is that it results from an attractor, meaning that a large set of initial conditions all produce the same invariant set, reducing the requirement of having to explain what caused the initial conditions.