/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10274379]

What is /sci/'s favorite interpretation of quantum mechanics?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1301.1069.pdf

[El Arcón No.10274399]

>>10274379
I like the one where classical phenomena satisfy the action principle with the least action and quantum phenomena are weird because they satisfy the action principle with the maximum of the action, and wherein those maximal trajectories "bounce" off of infinity but the universe is somehow asymmetrical about infinity, possibly antisymmetric, and that anti-symmetry inherent to the universe cause weird things like half integer spin for quantum particles but never for classical ones.
>Quantum Structure
>http://www.vixra.org/abs/1302.0037

[Anonymous No.10274419]

>>10274379
who takes the copenhagen one seriously? doesnt this one need a human observer?

[Anonymous No.10274443]

>>10274419
>human
no

[Anonymous No.10274449]

>>10274379
Consistent histories or Copenhagen. Quantum Bayesianism also deserves a honorable mention.

[Anonymous No.10274450]

>>10274379
super determinism

[Anonymous No.10274457]

>>10274443
who is an observer than? a camera? an shouting ape? a nigger throwing a rock?

[Anonymous No.10274465]

>>10274457
Something interacting with the system.
Other particles, a foot.....just something.
Observation means interaction.

[Anonymous No.10274493]

>>10274465
thank you kinds sir.
i guess the schrödinger pop sci shit made me believe it had to be a human one in the copenhagen statement.

[Anonymous No.10274517]

>>10274379
>Bohm
>0%

>all the others sum to 129%

At least bait properly

[Anonymous No.10274523]

>>10274517
>At least bait properly

[Anonymous No.10274530]

>>10274399
Why the fuck are you using x and chi right next to each other.

[Anonymous No.10274532]

>>10274379
>any interpretation besides de broglie-bohm
>not brainlet status

[Anonymous No.10274534]

I think Copenhagen is right but MW would be kind of amazing

[Anonymous No.10274797]

Everett. Just unitary evolution all day long baby.

>>10274399
>still thinks rigged Hilbert spaces are related to three generations of fermions
That's cute.

[Anonymous No.10274875]

>>10274399
Great paper, I lel'd

[Anonymous No.10274915]

>I have no preferred interpretation

[Anonymous No.10274927]

Information based is more promising in the near future.

[Anonymous No.10274939]

>>10274797
Everett "relative state interpretation" misnamed "many-worlds".

It is just so obvious it is true when you think about it.

[Anonymous No.10275152]

>>10274523
makes sense. a number probably picked information-based along with one of the others

[Anonymous No.10275153]

>>10274532
not as parsimonious as everett

[Anonymous No.10275169]

Why the hell is this so hard to understand that even scientists don't agree on one interpretation?

[Anonymous No.10275186]

>>10274419
>who takes the copenhagen one seriously?
Most professional physicists, apparently.
>doesnt this one need a human observer?
It sure does. So what?
>>10274465
Jesus, you're dense. There are interaction-free measurements; there's delayed choice quantum eraser, and even brainlet philosophers of physics agree that decoherence isn't sufficient to solve the measurement problem
>>10274517
>>10274532
Bohm is kill
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.2014

[Anonymous No.10275189]

>>10275186
>Bohm is kill
>https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.2014

>Hurr durr non-relativistic QM is non-relativistic, lel falsified

https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/back-pedaling-on-bohm.905194/

[Anonymous No.10275216]

>>10275189
>Hurr durr my classical pet theory is non-relativistic, lel Lorentz invariance violated
High IQ inference

[Anonymous No.10275233]

>>10275186
>https://arxiv.org/pdf/1410.2014
>falsified

>>>/trash/