Shminux, I trust you do know the actual answer to this, based on your demonstrated knowledge of QM. The essay does a qualitative job of this, here:
There are no plausible Feynman paths that end up with both LEFT and RIGHT sending amplitude to the same joint configuration. There would have to be a Feynman path from LEFT, and a Feynman path from RIGHT, in which all the quadrillions of differentiated particles ended up in the same places. So the amplitude flows from LEFT and RIGHT don't intersect, and don't interfere.
In order for the joint observer-observed system to be coherent, the two cases need to be reconcilable.
How is this a magical password? He pulls out the guts of decoherence and shows them to the reader!
Well, part of the guts. He's given a sufficient but not necessary criterion for decoherence.
Today's post, On Being Decoherent was originally published on 27 April 2008. A summary (taken from the LW wiki):
Discuss the post here (rather than in the comments to the original post).
This post is part of the Rerunning the Sequences series, where we'll be going through Eliezer Yudkowsky's old posts in order so that people who are interested can (re-)read and discuss them. The previous post was Where Experience Confuses Physicists, and you can use the sequence_reruns tag or rss feed to follow the rest of the series.
Sequence reruns are a community-driven effort. You can participate by re-reading the sequence post, discussing it here, posting the next day's sequence reruns post, or summarizing forthcoming articles on the wiki. Go here for more details, or to have meta discussions about the Rerunning the Sequences series.