Global Branching and Everettian Probability: A Critique of Sebens and Carroll’s Proposal

Nadia Blackshaw

Harvey R. Brown, Gal Ben Porath

Richard Dawid, Simon Friederich

We discuss the proposal by Sebens and Carroll to derive the Born rule in Everettian quantum mechanics from a principle they call ‘ESP-QM’. We argue that the proposal fails: ESP-QM is not, as Sebens and Carroll argue, a ‘less general version’ of an independently plausible principle, ESP, and can only be motivated by the empirical success of quantum mechanics, including use of the Born rule. Therefore, ESP-QM cannot have the status of a meta-theoretical principle of reasoning and provides no viable basis for deriving the Born rule.

Emily Adlam

Abstract This chapter discusses what would need to be done to address the epistemic difficulties associated with the Everett interpretation, then considers a number of putative solutions to the Everettian probability problem and assesses whether these approaches succeed in solving the epistemic aspects of that problem. The discussion covers naïve branch counting and Saunders’ sophisticated branch counting; Vaidman’s ‘measure of existence’ approach; the Deutsch-Wallce decision-theoretic approach; and the Sebens-Carroll and Vaidman-McQueen self-locating uncertainty approaches.

Peter J. Lewis

Simon Friederich

This chapter discusses further types of multiverse hypotheses: the branching worlds of Everettian quantum theory, the totality of possible worlds according to David Lewis’s modal realism, and the totality of mathematical structures, which – according to Max Tegmark – are all physically realized. I argue that suggested solutions to the probability problem in Everettian quantum theory are unconvincing. A recent proposal by Sebens and Carroll to derive the Born rule in the Everettian framework using considerations about self-locating belief turns out to suffer from a circularity problem because the central principle on which the derivation is based has no independent motivation besides, possibly, appeal to the Born rule itself. I further argue that it is not possible to coherently, in full seriousness, believe David Lewis's modal realism. Nor is it possible to coherently believe Max Tegmark's thesis that there is a multiverse of all mathematical structures in which they are physically realized. Tegmark's claim that our universe is itself a mathematical universe hypothesis is found to be incoherent.