Comments by "Hallands Menved" (@Hallands.) on "Parallel Worlds Probably Exist. Here’s Why" video.
-
1
-
If the multi-world concept is just for convenience, in what way is it then »better« than the Copenhagen understanding? Does it allow for better predictions?
Also how do you reach the conclusion that after the collapse/split, all connections are broken (as you stated) and there will never be any interaction between the two alternate worlds?
If that is to be the case, there is no uni-verse, rather an immense, indeterminable multitude of multi-verses of which we can’t know anything, but equally of no consequence for our (my?) universe, right?
This is what makes me lean more towards Bohr. If everything exist as both a potential wave and a potential particle, measurement would still cause a collapse, but a new GUT would be looking for a theory in which the potential of both the wave and the particle property were preserved (perhaps as a form of resonance in the surrounding world) thus still potentially interacting locally, if only to – ever so slightly – influence the outcome of other interactions as a feeble ghost of former existence, so to speak.
I also think that the very concept of »entanglement« speaks against multiverses:
a. How is the entanglement broken? (seems necessary to allow for a completely new, separate universe) or
b. If the entanglement isn’t broken (which seems the more sensible interpretation) how can we think of the newborn universe as separate from ours (mine?), seeing how they’d still remain entangled?
1