Many-Minds Cosmology and Jante Law

In Many-Minds Relativity and Many-Minds Quantum Mechanics I explore an idea which can also be applied to cosmology, as discussed in previous posts. This idea has developed as an alternative to the following two views on the choice of reference or coordinate system for description of phenomena in space and time dominating physics:

1. There is a unique preferred reference system (Newton's absolute space and time).
2. There is no preferred reference system (Einstein's relativity theory).

We know that 2 came out as a reaction to the fruitless attempts to identify Newton's absolute space in the form a luminoferous aether medium carrying electromagnetic waves in the Michelson-Morley experiments.

2 is a generalization of Galileo's departure from geocentrism into heliocentrism relating to the Cosmological Principle (CP) or (generalized) Copernican Principle:

• If the Earth is not the center of the Universe, then there is no center of the Universe at all.

Einstein formulated 2 as

• If my aether cannot be everybody's aether, then there is no aether at all.

2 connects to the first rule of the Jante Law identified by the Danish-Norwegian author Aksel Sandemose in his novel A fugitive crosses his tracks, as a characteristic of Scandinavian mentality:

• Don't think you're anything special,

which expresses a form of CP:

• If I am not special, then nobody else is special.

But we are not forced to conclude 2, if we agree that 1 is not true, since it is also possible that

• There are many preferred reference systems.
• There are many aethers.
• There are many centers of the Universe.
• There are many special people.

This is is the idea of Many-Minds physics, which offers to take physics out of a paralyzing grip of 2 including

• paradoxes of Einstein's special relativity
• difficulties of interpretation of the wave function of quantum mechanics
• CP of an isotropic and homogeneous universe requiring dark energy
• Swedish trauma of lacking self-esteem.

The question is if Many-Minds physics can attract the minds of many, or if is to remain the special idea of a special person?

Note that the basic idea of Einstein's (unique) special theory of relativity is that there is no special reference system. A contradiction?

Recall that the temptation to put forward 2 is very strong, since it gives physics the special top position in the hierarchy, as the objective science with arts, literature, political and social sciences ranking much lower as deploringly subjective. But 2 has brought physics into a

dead end of objective dark energy, string theory and statistics.

So what will then be best, to stick to 2 and be the best but have nothing to offer, or to subdue to reality, give up the special position and step forward?

Of course, Many-Minds connects to a pluralistic society, while One-Mind or No-Mind connects to an autocratic society.