Why I favour the Many Worlds interpretation

I favour the Everettian “Many Worlds” or “Quantum Multiverse” interpretation of quantum physics based on 3 “observations”:

1. The outcome of the measurement of superpositions is not pre-determined but random.

2. Information transfer is limited to the speed of light.

3. Entanglement happens.

When I try to interpret entanglement using Many Worlds no action at a distance is involved (“es gibt keine spukhafte Fernwirkung” as Einstein would have said if he’d subscribed to the Many Worlds interpretation). 

To take an example of a pair of electrons, each in a superposition of up and down spins, when the spins are measured there are four possible results representing four potential worlds (up up, up down, down up and down down). When a pair of electrons are entangled so that their spins, although not determined, will be opposite when measured, these four possibilities are reduced to two potential worlds (up down, down up). So when the pair are then separated and the spin of one is measured, the world splits at that location and the observer also splits and will be in one of these two worlds. If a measurement is taken of the other electron, the world splits at that location and that observer will be in one of the same two worlds. When news of the outcome travels from one location to the other it travels to the world where the electron spin is in the opposite direction.

The superpositions at the heart of this type of entanglement should be regarded as potential Everettian Worlds. This follows naturally from the observations that the outcome of a quantum measurement is not pre-determined and that information can't travel faster than the speed of light.

This seems to demand that both outcomes must exist in their own World because the other entangled particle can also give either outcome when measured. So a World must exist to accommodate each of the entangled particle's outcomes. Entanglement in this interpretation is just a partial "collapse" from 4 possible outcomes to 2 possible outcomes through a quantum state exclusion process or the creation of a 2 outcome system through conservation of a previous quantity in the creation of the particles.

Alice and Ted with one particle while Bob and Carol have their's at a distant location

If we have two particles in an entangled state (entangled particles) in the possession of Alice and Bob, Alice and Bob can take their particles to distant locations and the entanglement is still there.

If Bob is accompanied by a witness, Carol, and Alice is accompanied by Ted, then to Carol, Bob is entangled with the particle because when she observes the particle's quantum state she automatically knows that Bob will report that same state. To Alice, Bob and Carol and Bob's particle are entangled with her particle because once she observes her particle's state she knows the state of Bob's particle and she knows Bob and Carol's opinion regarding that state. Ted, likewise, is entangled with the particles and Alice and Bob and Carol.