Dan_Moore comments on How Many Worlds? - Less Wrong

2 Post author: smk 14 December 2011 02:51PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (64)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Dan_Moore 15 December 2011 04:51:23PM 0 points [-]

I failed to mention one major additional point. Decoherence and MWI also account for the observed fine-tuning of the universe to support life, including key details of the inflation hypothesis. The standard interpretation doesn't.

As to conservation of mass-energy, this seems to be something that conflicts with your intuition that if there were decoherence, mass-energy would be divided up into the various branches and thus diminished in each branch. If you did accept the superiority of decoherence & MWI over the standard interpretation, you'd have to set this intuition aside.

You are free to select the version of Occam's Razor that appeals to you. I like the one that chooses a complete explanation (that also explains fine-tuning) over an incomplete explanation that also requires an exogenous wave-collapse for the first natural observer.