whowhowho comments on If Many-Worlds Had Come First - Less Wrong

44 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 10 May 2008 07:43AM

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

Comments (179)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: whowhowho 10 February 2013 09:50:15PM *  -2 points [-]

If anyone shows you Minkowskian spacetime and asks why they should adopt your weird epistemology when there's all these perfectly natural invariants to use,

Reversing the direction of the analogy, what are the "invariants" of MWI? A natural, emergent multiversal basis? nah. A natural, emergent Born's law? Nah...

or asks you what it would even mean for everyone to have a private reality, yell at them that the universe as a whole clearly can't have an objective state of motion because there's nothing else it could be moving relative to.

That's actually a perfectly reasonable argument.

Basically, Special Relativity only you'd rather give up the attempt to describe a coherent state of affairs than give up on talking separately about space and time the way you're accustomed to.

rQM is coherent, observers can't make contradictory observations. It just isn't objective. It also isn't anything-goes philosophical subjectivism. It is an interpretation that agrees with all the results of the formalism, like any interpretation properly so called, so it does not break anything or make anything unscientific.