/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15667401
Most of the problem that people have with QM have to do with INTERPRETATIONS of QM, not it's utility, ie, the ontic status of the wave function. If you take it to be real, and take a physicalist point of view on consciousness, for instance, then you get this idea of there being things like alive and dead cats, which is stupid. If you take bohrs view,
>>15667382
Then there is no quantum world that even has to be calculated and rendered and spacetime classical type observables like position and momentum are only calculated and rendered when measurement is made. You couldn't even render the wave function anyways because there would be infinite info in a continuous function. And this in fact is the most efficient way to minimize computational complexity if you were going to create a universe and present it to observers, ie render on demand and only to the resolution of the specs of the measuring device, whether it be a wave particle duality experiment of a consciousness observer's sensory data stream, ie a cat. And so a cat's consciousness would be a measuring device and would "collapes the wave function" ie demand a spacetime sensory data stream of classical type observables. And this gets into why people started to postulate the VR nature of the universe in terms of things like the simulation theory. The universe acts like a render on demand reality that is designed to appear AS IF there were a "quantum world", when infact the formalisms of QM are only tapping into the algos the rendering engine that renders the physical world uses, see pic.