@InertialObservr If I’m correct, you’re a proponent of Many Worlds interpretation of QM. How can we know this interpretation represents an accurate description of reality ?
-
-
Replying to @HerbertHitchens
By definition it must reproduce all of our current observations
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr @HerbertHitchens
Question is does it make any predictions?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cenobyte3 @InertialObservr
How about you
@cenobyte3 ? Which interpretation do you think is correct ?1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HerbertHitchens @InertialObservr
Hard to say...I think many worlds carries way too much baggage. I think we're missing something big...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cenobyte3 @HerbertHitchens
It really doesn't carry much baggage when you think about it as a "broken symmetry" as observed from any particular branch.. The name makes it sound more ontologically heavy than it is
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr @HerbertHitchens
Yes and no, but where do all the branches live? They all have a physical existence somewhere. Separated from each other in some abstract space. My other difficulty is the lack of experimental differentiation...might as well say Langoleers eat the wave function :p
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cenobyte3 @HerbertHitchens
hahah I agree but copenhagen and every other interpretation suffers from the exact same problems.. "where does a particle go when it's in a superposition?" etc. The idea behind these interpretations currently is to try to deduce something from other principles we hold dearly
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @InertialObservr @HerbertHitchens
Thinking of entanglement...in one sense it seems like there's non local communication within the system...yet the components move sublight to get seperated... timeline separated...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
I've thought about the EPR paradox a bit and I don't think that the fact that information cant be used for communication is a resolution in any deep sense. It just seems like a weaseling out of the problem by putting all of the ontological weight in the word "superposition"..
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.