/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.16181172]

What is your favourite interpretation of quantum mechanics and which one do you think is the right one?

[Anonymous No.16181195]

>>16181172
There is no right one. Models work within certain limits that then limit the applicability of the model.

[Anonymous No.16181222]

I believe in von Neumann / Wigner interpretation. I'm open though for a new, more refined interpretation, but currently all the alternatives are nonsense. Deterministic interpretations are cope by retards stuck in a prequantum era mindset and are incompatible with free will. Many worlds is a soi cartoonish travesty dismissing the Born rule, i.e. the only actual predictive tool of QM. Copenhagen, baysian, statistical etc are just mathematical accounts of QM without metaphysical interpretation. Transactional has too many plot holes. In my opinion a complete interpretation of QM cannot be formulated until we have unified QM with gravity.

[Anonymous No.16181329]

>>16181172
What an extremely shitty graph, lel

Consciousness arises OUT OF wave function collapse rather than somehow ""causing it"" - More precisely, consciousness (information/subtle matter/noetics) sits above matter in the metaphysical pecking order of the cosmos.

Moreover, the bohmian mechanics are not separate from hidden variables at all, in fact it was the pilot wave stuff that gave rise to this class of theories in the first place

Copenhagen is just a tangled fuzzy mess, and its core tennet in this graph should read "Shut up and calculate", that's about the only thing these materialist reductionists can actually agree on lol

Also as a footnote, natural philosophy and physics are the same thing. Again, very retarded and strawmannish graph right there

[Anonymous No.16181411]

>>16181172
superdeterminism.

[Anonymous No.16181490]

>>16181172
Some of these overlap. For instance the de Broglie Bohm pilot wave model is a hidden variable theory.

[Anonymous No.16181555]

>>16181172
What a retarded chart.
Anyways, relational QM.

>Relational quantum mechanics (RQM) is an interpretation of quantum mechanics which treats the state of a quantum system as being relational, that is, the state is the relation between the observer and the system. This interpretation was first delineated by Carlo Rovelli in a 1994 preprint, and has since been expanded upon by a number of theorists. It is inspired by the key idea behind special relativity, that the details of an observation depend on the reference frame of the observer, and uses some ideas from Wheeler on quantum information.
>
>The essential idea behind RQM is that different observers may give different accurate accounts of the same system. For example, to one observer, a system is in a single, "collapsed" eigenstate. To a second observer, the same system is in a superposition of two or more states and the first observer is in a correlated superposition of two or more states. RQM argues that this is a complete picture of the world because the notion of "state" is always relative to some observer. There is no privileged, "real" account.

[Anonymous No.16181639]

>>16181172
Look at all that "lawful" shit, this nigga is high as fuck again!

[Anonymous No.16181883]

My favorite interpretation is
>Shut up and calculate!

[Anonymous No.16181892]

>omg, my brain, it feels so big!!!
>its full of so much schizo kike jargon and fancy basedence polysyllables
>oh no
>i can't hold it in any longer
>i'm…
>i'm gonna…
>i'm gonna QUANTUUUUUUUUMMMMMM!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.16181916]

My bet is on hidden variables. Let's be honest, half of these interpetations sounds like a fairy tale and the world behaves deterministic AF in makro scales.