Reading the abstract he claims that if a realist interpretation claims to be lorentz invariant, it produces the wrong predictions.

So does this mean that the realist interpretations like the many worlds, bohmian mechanics, ect... Cannot be made lorentz invariant. Laymen here, so I'm having a tough time undertanding whats going on.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I suspect the meaning of realist in this article means something like "existence of local hidden variables" whereas the sense you are using it in "realist interpretation" is something like "not operational". You often hear these interpretations described as examples of "non-local hidden variable theories". Hope that help orientate you a bit. $\endgroup$ – Bruce Greetham Oct 28 '18 at 19:06
  • $\begingroup$ Bruce Greetham exactly hit the point, I just want to add that there exist Lorentz invariant versions of realist interpretations, such as many worlds, collapse models, and to some extent Bohmian mechanics, which goes further than saying "it's still possible". $\endgroup$ – Luke Oct 31 '18 at 15:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.