4 ms·

>there's no explanation for why you only experience a single branch Isn't that obvious given that the particles of your brain can't interact with the particles

>there's no explanation for why you only experience a single branch Isn't that obvious given that the particles of your brain can't interact with the particles of your brain in physically-different branches? >it seems fair to demand that a sufficiently intelligent agent with no prior knowledge of our physics should be able to predict what the theory says about their future observations. ... Even if you add that in, there's nothing to suggest which branch the agent will experience Don't you get that same problem with other interpretations that instead assume interactions can have a truly random result on some probability distribution?

n4r9 9y ago
> Isn't that obvious... Not immediately obvious to me. An agent could calculate the entangled state of themselves (including brain particles), the system and the measuring apparatus. This overall entangled state would in principle be pure, although the agent's own reduced state would be in a superposition which could be written in one of an infinite number of ways. What the agent should expect to experience in this situation is not at all clear, to me. > Don't you get that same problem with other interpretations... Most other interpretations have an explicit postulate relating physical probabilities to parts of the mathematical formalism. The agent can use this to make predictions about future observations.