Read the HTML document I pointed Anon to in my last response to hir
through Atkins. It does much better at explaining MWI than I do.
(Its a bit outside my field. :)
> This is a really difficult idea to grasp. How does the new universe know
> what to look like? I can see no other option other than the transmission
> or infomation (perhaps through this 'froth' that you spoke of). Perhaps there
> is a dimension through which information can travel which runs through the
> centres of all the universes, and the 'distance' between those points in
> minimal. Like this:
>
> -----------|----------- Universe 1
> -----------|----------- Universe 2
> -----------|----------- Universe 3
> dimension N
> etc etc...
Nope. It doesn't `know what to look like' at all, as I said, its not
being /constructed/ its simply /coming into being/ as the propogation
of the quantum wave continues. Information isn't `transfered' so much
as `worlds' come into being, whole, from Zeus' forehead.
> > Its just this sort of logical (or illogical) statement of fact that gets
> > the MWH model looked at as the product of a whacko looney-tunes nutcase.
> > I'm tempted to agree. :)
>
> I think I'm with you there.
On the other hand, it makes more sense than the Copenhagen
Interpretation, so I'm rather stuck believing in the MWI until
something better comes along. :)
> does that mean that the current universe is getting smaller WRT to the
> space available, although to us there is no percieved change. Is there,
> do you think, some space allocated for universi, and that space is always
> filled, or is new space created, or made available when new universi require
> it?
Ever done any work with fractals? As quantum events occur and
propogate, our universe `thins' if you consider it from a PoV in
Hilbert space, becoming thinner and thinner as slices split off, /but
the complexity does not change/. Its like looking at a Mandelbrot
going down on infinite zoom. Hilbert space is the `space' in
discussion and there're entire fields of study describing it. Feel
free to go look some up. :)
> What is stopping you though, if they are "next to" eachother. This assumes
> that they are next to eachother.
Because there's no way to `reach across' orthogonally in Hilbert space
to the direction of development.
> I don't like the sound of that. I'll see if I can find it on the net later.
Plenty of references. Don't let your brain ooze out your ears,
though.
> But that doesn't matter, becuase in an infinetly small time, it would be
> completely useless. Unless matter is going to exist semi-permanently,
> there is no reason to "summon" it.
Ah, but I can have arbitrarily large amounts of energy for arbitrarily
small times and during that time, I can /do/ something with that
energy. Woo-hoo!