You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Will_Newsome comments on Stupid Questions Open Thread - Less Wrong Discussion

42 Post author: Costanza 29 December 2011 11:23PM

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

Comments (265)

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

Comment author: Will_Newsome 30 December 2011 03:26:31AM *  5 points [-]

(There are two different argument sets here: 1) against random collapse, and 2) for MWI specifically. It's important to keep these distinct.)

Comment author: [deleted] 30 December 2011 03:30:52AM *  0 points [-]

Unless I'm missing something, EY argues that evidence against random collapse is evidence for MWI. See that long analogy on Maxwell's equations with angels mediating the electromagnetic force.

Comment author: Will_Newsome 30 December 2011 03:35:54AM 2 points [-]

It's also evidence for a bunch of other interpretations though, right? I meant "for MWI specifically"; I'll edit my comment to be clearer.

Comment author: [deleted] 30 December 2011 03:40:33AM 1 point [-]

I agree, which is one of the reasons why I feel 1) alone isn't enough to substantiate "There is no rational controversy to teach" and etc.