Science & Space :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
For all that is Scientifically related to Cosmology and Space. (NB: Please take discussions about UFOs, possible Alien contact, Crop-Circles, Alien Abductions, Planet-X and Niburu to the ‘Paranormal and Supernatural’ Message Board). 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Copenhagen doesn't have a problem with Schrodinger's cat, in the case of a conscious being such as a cat it does not truly arise anyway. With a non-conscious inhabitant the contents would simply be superpositioned without ever interacting with an observer. It only emphasises the oddity of a superpositioned state.


On the same topic I have wondered if MWI does do away with the Observer. The Observer still provides the splitting off point. With the classic double slit experiment, how do the alternate particles interact with one another if they split into their own universes rather than function in a different state and self-interact?

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Flukeworld, or why i don't believe in Everett's Many Worlds Hypothesis 519 Me 26-Jun-19 19:39
Re: Flukeworld, or why i don't believe in Everett's Many Worlds Hypothesis 41 Race Jackson 26-Jun-19 20:25
Re: Flukeworld, or why i don't believe in Everett's Many Worlds Hypothesis 62 Me 26-Jun-19 23:08


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.