Am I understanding the intepretations correctly?

  • B
  • Thread starter Trollfaz
  • Start date
In summary: The von Neumann-Wigner interpretation says that the collapse of the wave function is itself a quantum event. The wave function does not collapse until some observation is made. This observation is typically said to be the act of measuring something. Eugene Wigner abandoned the von Neumann-Wigner interpretation because he could not explain how the observer could cause the collapse of the wave function. He eventually came up with the concept of the "quantum state". This is a mathematical representation of the wave function. The quantum state is said to be associated with some particular physical state. So in summary, the Copenhagen interpretation states that everything exists in a superposition until it
  • #1
Trollfaz
141
14
Some (non quantum woo) articles say that its the Copenhagen interpretation that suggests that a conscious observer is needed to collapse the wavefunction. It is my understanding that the Copenhagen interpretation only states that everything exists in a superposition until measured. It does not make any effort to link measurement with consciousness. I believe that its the von Neumann-Wigner interpretation that says consciousness collapses the wavefunction. Also, Eugene Wigner eventually abandoned his work on this interpretation. Am I understanding the interpretations correctly?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
Trollfaz said:
Some (non quantum woo) articles say

Please give specific references.

Trollfaz said:
It is my understanding that the Copenhagen interpretation only states that everything exists in a superposition until measured.

Please give specific references for where you are getting your understanding from.

The answer to your question is probably going to be that what "the Copenhagen interpretation" means depends on which reference you use.
 
  • #5
PeterDonis said:
The answer to your question is probably going to be that what "the Copenhagen interpretation" means depends on which reference you use.

Based on the references you give (none of which are textbooks or peer-reviewed papers, btw, so none of them are really valid sources), this is indeed the answer.
 
  • #7
Trollfaz said:
Some (non quantum woo) articles say that its the Copenhagen interpretation that suggests that a conscious observer is needed to collapse the wavefunction. It is my understanding that the Copenhagen interpretation only states that everything exists in a superposition until measured. It does not make any effort to link measurement with consciousness. I believe that its the von Neumann-Wigner interpretation that says consciousness collapses the wavefunction. Also, Eugene Wigner eventually abandoned his work on this interpretation. Am I understanding the interpretations correctly?

All forms of Copenhagen require subjective division of the world into a "real" part and a "quantum" part. The language varies, but the "conscious observer" is simply one way to describe the need for this subjective division.

Copenhagen does not say that everything exists in superposition until measured. The superposition or wave function is part of the "quantum" part of the world. Copenhagen is agnostic about the reality of the quantum part. The quantum part is regarded simply as a tool to predict the probabilities of observations that occur in the "real" part of the world.
 
  • Like
Likes AlexCaledin

FAQ: Am I understanding the intepretations correctly?

What is the importance of understanding interpretations correctly?

The importance of understanding interpretations correctly is crucial in the field of science. It ensures that the data and results obtained are accurately interpreted, leading to valid conclusions and furthering scientific knowledge.

How can I ensure that I am understanding interpretations correctly?

To ensure that you are understanding interpretations correctly, it is important to carefully review the data and methodology used in the study. It may also be helpful to consult with other experts in the field for their insights and perspectives.

What are some common mistakes in understanding interpretations?

Some common mistakes in understanding interpretations include misinterpreting data, making assumptions without sufficient evidence, and overlooking important details or nuances in the findings.

How does bias affect understanding interpretations?

Bias can greatly affect understanding interpretations by influencing how data is perceived and interpreted. It is important to be aware of personal biases and strive for objectivity when analyzing and interpreting data.

What should I do if I am unsure about my understanding of interpretations?

If you are unsure about your understanding of interpretations, it is important to seek clarification from the researchers or experts involved in the study. It may also be helpful to do additional research and consult with other sources to gain a better understanding.

Similar threads

Replies
89
Views
6K
Replies
143
Views
8K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
24
Views
2K
Back
Top