Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 6547768" data-attributes="member: 6685730">Yeah!  Funny how these particles don't have a definite state until they're far enough away from each other that they seem to break light speed to resolve their states.  Seems like something a host-system could do though, huh?Right.  A meta-question of mine is "does this model break down under what we already know?"  The follow-up is "does this model change something?"  Where it might change something is that it's a different take on "many worlds," in that the different worlds have some impetus to bend a bit, and agree with each other.  Sort of like if Schroedinger's cat lives in one universe and dies in the other, then universes parallel to the "live" universe are somehow influenced toward the cat surviving.Sure, there is never a time when we disagree on what is going on in the universe - if we are in the same universe.  When two observers, moving relative to each other, disagree on when something happens or what time it is, that would be disagreement.  But do they have the same client, or are they using different clients?Sure.  Relative to you, they have past-future ordering.  The different-clients idea suggests, though, that there are more than one person; there's more than one observer.  See, now I'm wondering: does the state of science today assume that there is only one observer (since all events are consistent and cannot be disagreed upon), and that one observer is "ME?"  Or to put it another way, do we still think that the sun revolves around us?</blockquote>

Verification