tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post7360002499939121542..comments2024-03-27T20:37:09.185-05:00Comments on Alexander Pruss's Blog: What happens when collapse doesn't happen in collapse theories?Alexander R Prusshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-41743423598576091982015-03-16T20:01:57.759-05:002015-03-16T20:01:57.759-05:00It's just occurred to me that if we take the E...It's just occurred to me that if we take the Everett way, then it's hard to resist the idea that there are conscious beings at the tails of the wavefunction. For once we've admitted that conscious states can be superposed, then why can't low probability ones be superposed as well.<br />Not a very rigorous argument, though.Alexander R Prusshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05989277655934827117noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3891434218564545511.post-72500341523021716852015-03-16T18:31:29.151-05:002015-03-16T18:31:29.151-05:00Nice! I'd go for the Everett option though. Tr...Nice! I'd go for the Everett option though. True, the GRW theorist thereby doesn't avoid the metaphysical oddness of persons in a branching multiverse, but that doesn't strike me as a serious problem. The GRW theorist could still maintain that she (a) avoids the Everettian's extreme clash with our everyday conception of the world, and (b) can explain the Born rule. I thought these are the main attractions of GRW. <br />wohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17285766057687913879noreply@blogger.com