- #211
jbergman
- 424
- 187
I don't think it can be a gross misrepresentation because I've already said I don't follow this step in the argument for assigning probabilities in Zurek's paper. Also, what you described sounds exactly what I was attempting to describe with possibly cruder wording. I was planning to start a separate thread to discuss this on more detail.kered rettop said:You don't do that. It is a gross misrepresentation of how MWI works. For a start you don't strictly count "worlds" at all. You count orthogonal microstates. And you don't introduce "additional states to give the needed number of worlds to get the right probabilities". You introduce additional decoherence until the number of microstates is big enough for the next step in the argument to be valid. It's not even a mathematical sleight-of-hand. It is a physical process which continues indefinitely but is complete, for all practical purposes, in less than an attosecond for ordinary objects.
I think it would also be helpful to actually spell this out clearly with an example if you feel you have a grasp on this step.