New answers tagged

2

First, I read the questions FAQ for this and I hope this does not violate the rules. I am not asking for personal opinion, but for observations of hard evidence of trends on this subject. Check out the physicsworld article In Praise of Weakness where you can read this: "Quantum physics is being transformed by a radical new conceptual and experimental ...


-1

The measurement problem was more or less solved in the 1970s/80s by von Neumann's theory of measurement, the density matrix and decoherence, which explain the Born rule, which is the one thing that is actually perplexing about the Copenhagen interpretation. The basic principles behind measurement and decoherence had been understood intuitively since 1929 ...


0

The Copenhagen interpretation is rather vague. Let's take the most definite version in which the wave function describes reality up to the collapse. Since no description has been given of the mechanism of the collapse, there's a lot of room to monkey about with the predictions of what will happen as a result of collapse. When you ask whether other ...


4

The chain of reasoning runs something like this: Assume that the distributions $\mu_0(\lambda)$ and $\mu_+(\lambda)$ overlap in $\Delta\subset\Lambda$, so with probability $q$ preparing $|0⟩$ will produce a state $\lambda$ consistent with $|+⟩$ and vice versa. Assume that the two systems can be prepared independently. Therefore, with probability $q$ the ...


0

In Copenhagen interpretation, there is a possibility that experimenter survive, but it becomes very low if the experiment goes on. Of course it can still happen and in that case the experimenter will say, of course I'm alive because otherwise I can't make any statement. But that's very unlikely. In MWI, there is a certainty, each time the trigger is ...


1

The Copenhagen and MW are both "interpretations" in that they cannot be experimentally distinguished objectively in practice. However, if there was any proof that the MWI was correct then the Copenhagen explanation would be wrong. We would be talking about radically different theories. Quantum Suicide is a subjective verification and only works if the ...


3

Your statement on a pseudo-probability interpretation is slightly off, in that you most certainly did not write the Wigner quasi-probability distribution in your edit. Taking your two bases to be $x$ and $p$ for specificity, what you wrote, $ρ(x,p)$, up to a phase: $e^{(ixp/ħ)}$, is the "standard ordering prescription" for quasi-distribution functions, ...


-1

Lets say you take the theoretical function multiverse and use eulrtivic manifold distribution of stellar parallax (EMDSP equations) to find the conserved mass/energy of the two variables (energy, mass/consequence of gravitational flux) then one should find a percentage of mass being quite content and conserved.


2

To add to the other answers and lead to more self-study, I point you to papers about the Bell's Inequalities and the Free Will Theorem . These two point to the fact that the observations of experiments we have already made of quantum systems are incompatible with a number of things you would like to believe, each of which is connected to the vague meanings ...



Top 50 recent answers are included