“If the same laws are true at all levels—i.e., if many-worlds is correct—then when you measure one of a pair of entangled polarized photons, you end up in a world in which the photon is polarized, say, up-down, and alternate versions of you end up in worlds where the photon is polarized left-right. From your perspective before doing the measurement, the probabilities are 50⁄50. Light-years away, someone measures the other photon at a 20° angle to your own basis. From their perspective, too, the probability of getting either immediate result is 50⁄50 - they maintain an invariant state of generalized entanglement with your faraway location, no matter what you do. But when the two of you meet, years later, your probability of meeting a friend who got the same result is 11.6%, rather than 50%.
“If there is only one global world, then there is only a single outcome of any quantum measurement. Either you measure the photon polarized up-down, or left-right, but not both. Light-years away, someone else’s probability of measuring the photon polarized similarly in a 20° rotated basis, actually changes from 50⁄50 to 11.6%.”
I don’t see how you claim many-worlds gets you around the special relativity problem, the measurements can only be compared within one world—how would postulating other non-interacting (after the split) worlds help?
Also I have been having trouble following your posts. Your writing here has the same problem many weirdos (IDers, perpetual-motion-machine makers, etc) has. Any facts and arguments are getting lost in your wordiness. You might want to try to post brief explanations of what specifically your claims are in each post (maybe as occsasional summing-up posts).
“If the same laws are true at all levels—i.e., if many-worlds is correct—then when you measure one of a pair of entangled polarized photons, you end up in a world in which the photon is polarized, say, up-down, and alternate versions of you end up in worlds where the photon is polarized left-right. From your perspective before doing the measurement, the probabilities are 50⁄50. Light-years away, someone measures the other photon at a 20° angle to your own basis. From their perspective, too, the probability of getting either immediate result is 50⁄50 - they maintain an invariant state of generalized entanglement with your faraway location, no matter what you do. But when the two of you meet, years later, your probability of meeting a friend who got the same result is 11.6%, rather than 50%.
“If there is only one global world, then there is only a single outcome of any quantum measurement. Either you measure the photon polarized up-down, or left-right, but not both. Light-years away, someone else’s probability of measuring the photon polarized similarly in a 20° rotated basis, actually changes from 50⁄50 to 11.6%.”
I don’t see how you claim many-worlds gets you around the special relativity problem, the measurements can only be compared within one world—how would postulating other non-interacting (after the split) worlds help?
Also I have been having trouble following your posts. Your writing here has the same problem many weirdos (IDers, perpetual-motion-machine makers, etc) has. Any facts and arguments are getting lost in your wordiness. You might want to try to post brief explanations of what specifically your claims are in each post (maybe as occsasional summing-up posts).