>>16636135
you are a retard

>Likely an infinite amount of splitting happens
No, it must be countably finite. It is a big number, but it must be a countably finite number, becaue quantization implies that there is a finite number of states each particle can possibly take and there is a finite number of particles.
As a gross simplification, consider the 1-dimensional particle in a box: There is a finite number of positions it can take, as distance is quantized. Therefore in accordance with many worlds, this one particle will "create", a countably finite number of worlds after each planck time (time is also quantized as it is defined in terms of distanced, which is quantized) passes. It's a lot, but it is not infinite, it is always countably finite. After any number of planck times, you can in principle determine the exact number of worlds the particle has created. This generalizes to the more complex cases.

>let me give an analogy
This has nothing to do with quantum mechanics, but I'll humor you on the sillier things:

>>16636150
>Counterpoint: you don't.
Counterpoint: how do you know?

>because in the distant future there are likely to be many more Boltzmann brains
Why is that? How do you know there CAN be any at all? You're making a strong claim with no evidence.

>>16636152
>why am I wrong?
Because fundamentally this argument mixes
a wrong analogy with physical theory. You are trying to say that worlds formed by the minute movements of particles are people, when they are are not in fact people.
It's not science fiction, it's not even fictional science. It's scientific fanfiction.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/sci/

Thread:

An objection to many worlds from anthropics