I think that you are putting forward example hypothesis that you don’t really believe in order to prove your point. Unfortunately it isn’t clear which hypothesis you do believe, and this makes your point opaque.
From a mathematical perspective, quantum collapse is about as bad as insisting that the universe will suddenly cease to exist in n years time. Quantum collapse introduces a nontrivial complexity penalty, in particular you need to pick a space of simultaneity.
The different Turing machines don’t interact at all. Physicists can split the universe into a pair of universes in the quantum multiverse, and then merge them back together in a way that lets them detect that both had an independent existence. In the quantum bomb test, without a bomb, the universes in which the photon took each path are identical, allowing interference. If the bomb does exist, no interference. Many worlds just says that these branches carry on existing whether or not scientists manage to make them interact again.
I think that you are putting forward example hypothesis that you don’t really believe in order to prove your point. Unfortunately it isn’t clear which hypothesis you do believe, and this makes your point opaque.
From a mathematical perspective, quantum collapse is about as bad as insisting that the universe will suddenly cease to exist in n years time. Quantum collapse introduces a nontrivial complexity penalty, in particular you need to pick a space of simultaneity.
The different Turing machines don’t interact at all. Physicists can split the universe into a pair of universes in the quantum multiverse, and then merge them back together in a way that lets them detect that both had an independent existence. In the quantum bomb test, without a bomb, the universes in which the photon took each path are identical, allowing interference. If the bomb does exist, no interference. Many worlds just says that these branches carry on existing whether or not scientists manage to make them interact again.