The idea is to abolish the distinction between ‘mathematical existence’ and ‘physical existence’ or, if you like, between ‘possibility’ and ‘actuality’.
I understand that that is the intuitive idea. But how is the hypothesis to be formulated in such a way that we could evaluate its probability, even in principle?
I wrote this some years ago: Sink the Tegmark!. As you can see, I share your skepticism as to whether there’s enough sense to be made of Tegmark’s theory that we can derive empirical predictions from it.
Even so, you should definitely read Tegmark’s original papers—he does address this question somewhat.
I understand that that is the intuitive idea. But how is the hypothesis to be formulated in such a way that we could evaluate its probability, even in principle?
I wrote this some years ago: Sink the Tegmark!. As you can see, I share your skepticism as to whether there’s enough sense to be made of Tegmark’s theory that we can derive empirical predictions from it.
Even so, you should definitely read Tegmark’s original papers—he does address this question somewhat.