I’d be surprised if you can formulate many-worlds in a way so that there are as many worlds in the past as in the future.
The number of worlds isn’t necessarily conserved. But the things called “worlds” in MW aren’t made out of distinct pieces of material stuff. (ETA: That is, you don’t have one collection of atoms constituting one world while a disjoint collection of atoms constitutes another world.)
The number of worlds isn’t necessarily conserved. But the things called “worlds” in MW aren’t made out of distinct pieces of material stuff. (ETA: That is, you don’t have one collection of atoms constituting one world while a disjoint collection of atoms constitutes another world.)
I don’t think I’m going to understand many-worlds today.
Good and Real explains it pretty well. (Just resumed reading it today, and realized I liked the chapters on physics more than I thought I would.)