<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Does it Make Sense to Speak of Self-Locating Uncertainty in the Universal Wave Function? Remarks on Sebens and Carroll · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.1944/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.1944/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Does it Make Sense to Speak of Self-Locating Uncertainty in the Universal Wave Function? Remarks on Sebens and Carroll — mentioned by n4r9</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20930182</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1408.1944:20930182</guid><pubDate>Tue, 10 Sep 2019 16:44:25 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Adrian Kent has a lengthy and detailed overview of MWIs pre-2009 which may interest you [0]. He discusses Wallace&amp;#x27;s formulation, contrasts it with other formulations and touches on branching indifference. He also has a more recent (and much more brief) article which refers to the Self-locating Uncertainty arguments [1]. I have previously come across Deutsch&amp;#x27;s formulation in terms of information flow [2], along with what seemed like a very strong criticism from Wallace and Christopher Timpson [3] that his model was not gauge-invariant. [0] https://arxiv.org/pdf/0905.0624.pdf [1]…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1408.1944/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>gr-qc</category></item></channel></rss>
