no... all possiblities from a choice exist equally at the same moment up until the choice is made to proceed along one branch... at which point that branch taken becomes the focus and the other possibilites fall into disfocus - yet they still exist. (the same as the other 2 forward paths extending from a 4 way intersection still exist, with only one forward, the third, path being travelled on)
Its not mixing up the possibilites of a single univers... the "single universe", is the one which is in "focus" - "logic" has nothing to do with it, as there is nothing logical about choice. At the moment of a choice, all possibilities extending from that choice exist equally.

No, no, no no...;) I am sounding like "David Hayward"!

What you are saying implies that you think you exist in some solopsistic world in which your choices define not only your own universe but that of everyone else.

I know some people do actually believe this sort of stuff, even after medication, but it does make discussing reality with other sentient beings a little difficult.

now there's no need to be like that.....
you might like to revisit your use of solipsism as well ;)



don't confuse the probability of a spinning coin coming up heads or tails, with the possibility of winning or losing at the landing of it, but while the coin is spinning - both winning or losing exist equally

Exactly....nothing exists until the timeline reaches it......once a choice is made or an action taken or an event happens all other possibilities also cease to exist, I do not exist in an alternate universe taking a dump right now just because I decided to go to the bathroom instead of returning to the computer.

basically, except one choice leads to another choice and so on (lust like one traffic intersection leads to another one, etc)... but the other possibilities do still exist (in parallel) to the possibility you elected to go with... so while you chose to go take a dump on the way back, in parallel, you also returned to your computer.

Only theoretically I would argue, but I don't buy the paralell theory.....too much infinity for my liking, it would mean every particle that has ever existed since the creation event has created an infinite number of existences which in turn create more of the same in each new event.....seems somehow ineficcient and uncharacteristic of a finely ballanced set of rules that I believe the universe runs on.

Yes, right about the spelling, if nothing else. I blame a late night and too much booze and rugby, although it could not just be that I am an ignorant slob. The Wallabies were disappointing, though I am amazed that the All Blacks managed to win twice in one day.

" but the other possibilities do still exist (in parallel)" Well they exist as logical (or mathematical) objects (in our universe) indeed, but where is the evidence that they "exist" anywhere else? There is'nt any. This illustrates the danger of taking mathematical models and trying to create normal language versions - the words have so much baggage that it is easy to make inferences that mislead even the scientists who are supposed to know better - often especially the scientists, most of whom seem not to understand the difference between a logical object and a physical object.

parallel universes exist in parallel to this universe, not as mathematical objects in this universe though

there would have to be an infinite number of universes for every particle that ever existed.......makes no sense.

According to classical physics, velocities will sum up and you will get more than speed of light. However, according to theory of special relativity, only small velocities can be summed in simply way. Higher velocities must be summed using special formula: http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/2/0...12b6a57779.png. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity-addition_formula