What was 'patently obvious' was that it was being used by some in a mystic-experience-substitute way. I have not the physics to comment on its content, so far as it is a question of physics; but as a (supposed) postulation of a physical actuality, it appears to me to have more of the mystical than the physic-al [ie pertaining to physics rather than to physique, tho not perhspas exclusively so] about. I am a struggler in that confusing hinterland between the physical & the metaphysical, rather than a big tease ~~ I think...

Reading that Stanford Encyclopedia entry on MWI linked above does not appear to me a million miles removed from the activities of the alchemists to which I refer above.

Compare the tone and ambience of {Wikipedia}

"H.J. Sheppard gives the following as a comprehensive summary:
Alchemy is the art of liberating parts of the Cosmos from temporal existence and achieving perfection which, for metals is gold, and for man, longevity, then immortality and, finally, redemption"

with

"The fundamental idea of the MWI, going back to Everett 1957, is that there are myriads of worlds in the Universe in addition to the world we are aware of. In particular, every time a quantum experiment with different outcomes with non-zero probability is performed, all outcomes are obtained, each in a different world, even if we are aware only of the world with the outcome we have seen"

Do you perceive no similarity in tone and approach? They set the same sort of nerve-tingle going in my shoulder-blades.



~M~