the present paper.

It is worthwhile to point out the reasons for choosing the embedding before quantization. In the approach ‘before quantization’, the constrained quantum equation is the Wheeler-DeWitt equation $\hat{H}\Psi=0$ and obviously this is timeless in character. We should have a way to interpret the wave function in a timeless way i.e., one has to settle between the ‘Copenhagen interpretation’ and the ‘Everettian interpretation’ that includes now the decoherence mechanism compared to the collapse of wavefunction of the former interpretation. This is the first problem. The second problems relates to the initial conditions for the Wheeler-DeWitt wavefunction, now classed by the words ‘wavefunction debate’ because of various boundary condition proposals; namely, Hartle-Hawking no boundary proposal [@har:prd], Vilenkin’s tunneling proposal [@vil:prd] and Linde’s proposals [@lin:jetp]. Recently another proposal [@bis:prd] has been made considering complex solutions of Hamilton-Jacobi equation of classical general relativity. In the proposal, termed as ‘wormhole dominance proposal’ attempts have been made to include complex solutions in the framework of the Wheeler-DeWitt equation with a general prescription of retaining ‘allowable’ and/or ‘good’ complex WKB paths. The ‘wormhole dominance proposal’ serves as a naive attempt.There were many attempts [@hall:prd2; @lyo:prd; @hall:prd3] to consider complex solution while evaluating the wave 