Moshe-Mordechai van Zuiden
Psychology, Medicine, Science, Politics, Oppression, Integrity, Philosophy, Jews -- For those who like their news and truths frank and sharp

How Quantum Mechanics proves there are no QM parallel universes

QM is too hard for me, but I may spot inconsistencies all right

QM is way above my brain capacity, but sometimes, I can contribute because I detected an inconsistency in such a theory.

Parallel-universes people (PUP) use a wild ad-hoc hypothesis of PUs. Tiny tiny objects, subject to QM, are undetermined until they are detected. Observation makes them come out either this way or that way. What happens to the one way when detection shows it the other way? So, the PUP postulate the one way happened too but only in a parallel universe.

Sabine Hossenfelder (the above clip) asks why the observer doesn’t also split into one in each universe (only has the best of both worlds).

I have a better question. How come, in the other world, there is a determined outcome without an observer? That’s against QM theory. Therefore, there is no parallel universe, let alone multiple ones.

But then there must be people who fantasize that every choice we make duplicates us to live separately in two parallel universes: the one who managed to resist the temptation to steal alongside the one who didn’t.

This would mean that the more ethically we live, the greater the number of unethical duplicates we generate in so many parallel universes. Absurd and repulsive. Especially because it can’t be checked, but if it were true, the thief who murders and lies and rapes, overall, come out more ethical than a decent person. It’s one thing to understand why physical sciences can’t deal so well with ethics, but quite another to hold that science proves that a labor coach and a mass murderer are ethically equal professions.

Last but not least, I think the multiverse concept is a nice brainteaser and is fine as a means to widen the brain’s horizon, pardon the pun, but as it is now, it falls outside of physical science because we can’t verify it.

This appears to be what Sabine says here too:

And she says too, that the problem gives the impression of stemming from mathematicians who assume that their formulations must reflect reality.

That is exactly what I’ve been saying forever. If you say that spacetime has four dimensions, that is a mathematical model. Then you can’t ask: Why can we freely walk in 7 directions but not into the past? The map is not the territory. You can’t ask why not. As soon as the map doesn’t depict the territory, you hit the limit of its accuracy and usefulness.

Lastly, Roger Penrose has a lot of empathy for QM. It’s successful all right, but it needs serious help. He appears to think in the direction of the wavefunction not collapsing at all. That there never were two possibilities.

That reminds me of Richard Feynman, who, in the booklet QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter seems to say Werner Heisenberg’s Quantum Uncertainty Principle, which looks like the foundation stone of QM’s probability, does not exist, and is the result of using the old terms in the new understanding he developed. That if you quit that, there is no uncertainty. (1983, footnote pp 55-56: “If you … use arrows … there is no need for an uncertainty principle!”) Too bad no one asked him to detail what he meant. In 1964 he still assumed chance and uncertainty were real:

Last but certainly least is the below clip that ‘proves’ the multiverse by a philosophical mistake without a formal name. Fifteen years ago, I thought of calling it the related-in-ignorance fallacy. Or maybe we could call it the Empty Equivalence Fallacy. The EEF goes like this: We don’t understand Free Will, and we don’t understand Awareness, so they must be related. Or: We don’t understand Volition or the Soul, so the Soul creates FW. Or: x divided by 0 = undetermined. y divided by 0 = undetermined. So, x = y. Or: Aliens are foreign to us and so is the multiverse, so that’s where they live.

About the Author
MM is a prolific and creative writer and thinker, previously a daily blog contributor to the TOI. He often makes his readers laugh, mad, or assume he's nuts—close to perfect blogging. He's proud that his analytical short comments are removed both from left-wing and right-wing news sites. None of his content is generated by the new bore on the block, AI. * As a frontier thinker, he sees things many don't yet. He's half a prophet. Half. Let's not exaggerate. Or not at all because he doesn't claim G^d talks to him. He gives him good ideas—that's all. MM doesn't believe that people observe and think in a vacuum. He, therefore, wanted a broad bio that readers interested can track a bit what (lack of) backgrounds, experiences, and educations contribute to his visions. * This year, he will prioritize getting his unpublished books published rather than just blog posts. Next year, he hopes to focus on activism against human extinction. To find less-recent posts on a subject XXX among his over 2000 archived ones, go to the right-top corner of a Times of Israel page, click on the search icon and search "zuiden, XXX". One can find a second, wilder blog, to which one may subscribe too, here: or by clicking on the globe icon next to his picture on top. * Like most of his readers, he believes in being friendly, respectful, and loyal. However, if you think those are his absolute top priorities, you might end up disappointed. His first loyalty is to the truth. He will try to stay within the limits of democratic and Jewish law, but he won't lie to support opinions or people when don't deserve that. (Yet, we all make honest mistakes, which is just fine and does not justify losing support.) He admits that he sometimes exaggerates to make a point, which could have him come across as nasty, while in actuality, he's quite a lovely person to interact with. He holds - how Dutch - that a strong opinion doesn't imply intolerance of other views. * Sometimes he's misunderstood because his wide and diverse field of vision seldomly fits any specialist's box. But that's exactly what some love about him. He has written a lot about Psychology (including Sexuality and Abuse), Medicine (including physical immortality), Science (including basic statistics), Politics (Israel, the US, and the Netherlands, Activism - more than leftwing or rightwing, he hopes to highlight reality), Oppression and Liberation (intersectionally, for young people, the elderly, non-Whites, women, workers, Jews, LGBTQIA+, foreigners and anyone else who's dehumanized or exploited), Integrity, Philosophy, Jews (Judaism, Zionism, Holocaust and Jewish Liberation), the Climate Crisis, Ecology and Veganism, Affairs from the news, or the Torah Portion of the Week, or new insights that suddenly befell him. * Chronologically, his most influential teachers are his parents, Nico (natan) van Zuiden and Betty (beisye) Nieweg, Wim Kan, Mozart, Harvey Jackins, Marshal Rosenberg, Reb Shlomo Carlebach, and, lehavdil bein chayim lechayim, Rabbi Dr. Natan Lopes Cardozo, Rav Zev Leff, and Rav Meir Lubin. This short list doesn't mean to disrespect others who taught him a lot or a little. One of his rabbis calls him Mr. Innovation [Ish haChidushim]. Yet, his originalities seem to root deeply in traditional Judaism, though they may grow in unexpected directions. In fact, he claims he's modernizing nothing. Rather, mainly basing himself on the basic Hebrew Torah text, he tries to rediscover classical Jewish thought almost lost in thousands of years of stifling Gentile domination and Jewish assimilation. (He pleads for a close reading of the Torah instead of going by rough assumptions of what it would probably mean and before fleeing to Commentaries.) This, in all aspects of life, but prominently in the areas of Free Will, Activism, Homosexuality for men, and Redemption. * He hopes that his words will inspire and inform, and disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed. He aims to bring a fresh perspective rather than harp on the obvious and familiar. When he can, he loves to write encyclopedic overviews. He doesn't expect his readers to agree. Rather, original minds should be disputed. In short, his main political positions are among others: anti-Trumpism, for Zionism, Intersectionality, non-violence, anti those who abuse democratic liberties, anti the fake ME peace process, for original-Orthodoxy, pro-Science, pro-Free Will, anti-blaming-the-victim, and for down-to-earth, classical optimism, and happiness. Read his blog on how he attempts to bridge any tensions between those ideas or fields. * He is a fetal survivor of the pharmaceutical industry (, born in 1953 to his parents who were Dutch-Jewish Holocaust survivors who met in the largest concentration camp in the Netherlands, Westerbork. He grew up a humble listener. It took him decades to become a speaker too, and decades more to admit to being a genius. But his humility was his to keep. And so was his honesty. Bullies and con artists almost instantaneously envy and hate him. He hopes to bring new things and not just preach to the choir. * He holds a BA in medicine (University of Amsterdam) – is half a doctor. He practices Re-evaluation Co-counseling since 1977, is not an official teacher anymore, and became a friendly, powerful therapist. He became a social activist, became religious, made Aliyah, and raised three wonderful kids. Previously, for decades, he was known to the Jerusalem Post readers as a frequent letter writer. For a couple of years, he was active in hasbara to the Dutch-speaking public. He wrote an unpublished tome about Jewish Free Will. He's a strict vegan since 2008. He's an Orthodox Jew but not a rabbi. * His writing has been made possible by an allowance for second-generation Holocaust survivors from the Netherlands. It has been his dream since he was 38 to try to make a difference by teaching through writing. He had three times 9-out-of-10 for Dutch at his high school finals but is spending his days communicating in English and Hebrew - how ironic. G-d must have a fine sense of humor. In case you wonder - yes, he is a bit dyslectic. If you're a native English speaker and wonder why you should read from people whose English is only their second language, consider the advantage of having an original peek outside of your cultural bubble. * To send any personal reaction to him, scroll to the top of the blog post and click Contact Me. * His newest books you may find here:
Related Topics
Related Posts