I believe I may have found a rather major omission in Sean Carroll’s book Something Deeply Hidden: Quantum Worlds and the Emergence of Spacetime:
It seems that Carroll does not reference the fact that his “Many-Worlds” interpretation is laid to rest by Wigner, Wheeler et. al. on page 294 of Quantum Theory and Measurement (Princeton Leg… (Paperback) by John Archibald Wheeler, Wojciech Hubert Zurekin, in a paper by Eugene Wigner, where Wigner writes:
“Many-world” theories are much more difficult to discuss than theories of hidden variables. They postulate—as mentioned earlier—that if a measurement with a probabilistic outcome is undertaken, the world splits into several worlds, and each possible outcome of the observations appears in the fraction of the new worlds given by the quantum-mechanical probability of that outcome. . . It is, of course, difficult to see the meaning of the statement that there are other worlds with which we never will have any contact, which have no influence on us, and which we cannot influence or perceive in any way. . . the statement that there are such worlds, and that they are constantly created in large numbers, is entirely meaningless. It can neither be confirmed nor refuted.” –Eugene Wigner
From https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Library/dp/0691613168/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1499118080&sr=8-6&keywords=quantum+theory+measurement ( https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Library/dp/0691613168/ )
Does Dr. Sean Caroll quote or reference this passage anywhere in his book which celebrates and promotes Many Worlds as science to the unsuspecting public? If so, I could not find it at all.
If Carroll does not reference the above passage, why would Carroll omit such a foundational and complete dismissal of his Many Worlds interpretation, accomplished by Wigner in a most simple, logical manner?
Perhaps Carroll found it impossible to refute the noble logic of Nobel Laureate Eugene Wigner’s words, and instead chose to simply ignore him?
At any rate–Dr. Caroll–if you have indeed omitted the exalted words of Wigner either accidentally or intentionally, please do add the words to future editions of your book.
As a Caltech scientist with a larger media footprint than perhaps any other postmodern scientist, you owe it to the world to present thorough and honest research, in the true spirit of science and the edification of all.
If you disagree with Wigner, please feel free to try and dismantle his simple logic and reason in future updates to your book.
Dr. Carroll–I would highly recommend that you read and engage in conversation with the Greats on quantum mechanics before passing yourself off as an expert. Please read this wonderful book containing the Words of the Founding Fathers and let us know what you think of Wigner’s simple reasoning: https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Library/dp/0691613168/
Perhaps Carroll could read Wigner’s wonderful words during his next appearance on the Joe Rogan Podcast?
“Many-world” theories are much more difficult to discuss than theories of hidden variables. They postulate—as mentioned earlier—that if a measurement with a probabilistic outcome is undertaken, the world splits into several worlds, and each possible outcome of the observations appears in the fraction of the new worlds given by the quantum-mechanical probability of that outcome. . . It is, of course, difficult to see the meaning of the statement that there are other worlds with which we never will have any contact, which have no influence on us, and which we cannot influence or perceive in any way. . . the statement that there are such worlds, and that they are constantly created in large numbers, is entirely meaningless. It can neither be confirmed nor refuted.” –Eugene Wigner
From https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Library/dp/0691613168/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1499118080&sr=8-6&keywords=quantum+theory+measurement ( https://www.amazon.com/Quantum-Theory-Measurement-Princeton-Library/dp/0691613168/ )
Theoretical Physics Renaissance 