Quantum Interpretation Poll (2011)

In summary, the conversation discusses an annual quantum interpretation poll where one can vote for their preferred interpretation of reality. The poll is missing the consistent histories interpretation and does not have a way to specify details for "other". The thermal interpretation of quantum mechanics is brought up and the speaker provides links to further information on this interpretation, including its benefits and its compatibility with classical thermodynamics. The thermal interpretation is based on the observation that quantum mechanics predicts classical thermodynamics and takes as its ontological basis the states occurring in statistical mechanics. The thermal interpretation also addresses the issue of uncertainty in quantum mechanics and defines a surface ontology and a deeper ontology.

Which Quantum Interpretation do you think is correct?

  • Copenhagen Interpretation

    Votes: 34 22.7%
  • GRW ( Spontaneous Collapse )

    Votes: 2 1.3%
  • Consciousness induced Collapse

    Votes: 11 7.3%
  • Stochastic Mechanics

    Votes: 3 2.0%
  • Transactional Interpretation

    Votes: 4 2.7%
  • Many Worlds ( With splitting of worlds )

    Votes: 12 8.0%
  • Everettian MWI (Decoherence)

    Votes: 18 12.0%
  • de-Broglie Bohm interpretation

    Votes: 17 11.3%
  • Some other deterministic hidden variables

    Votes: 15 10.0%
  • Ensemble interpretation

    Votes: 13 8.7%
  • Other (please specify below)

    Votes: 21 14.0%

  • Total voters
    150
  • #246
josephwouk said:
I believe I understand QM.

I rely on this august group of physicists to disabuse me of my illusion.

I begin by assuming the two most accurate and proven theories in physics are correct; QM and general relativity.

1. Relativity says that we exist in a 4 dimensional universe that we apprehend as a 3 dimensional universe. Einstein believed that this was an "illusion." 2. [..]
Not exactly; "space is a three-dimensional continuum" - clarification here:
http://www.bartleby.com/173/17.html
4. The Schrödinger equation describes particles as waves that permeate all of space-time, i.e. existing in a 4 dimensional "block universe" that we find particularly difficult to conceptualize.
"block universe discussion here:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=567395
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=595021
The threads are still open for your comments. :smile:
5. Decoherence occurs when these waves encounter electromagnetic forces that compel them to appear as particles in that particular 3 dimensional subset. Information theory has shown that additional dimensions add enormously to the amount of information that can be held by any bit. This is why waves in 4 dimensions appear to us in 3 dimensions as particles. The old "Flatland" metaphor illustrates this perfectly. [..]
Do you have a link? The only wave descriptions that I know are propagation in space as function of time - thus "3+1"D.
8. [.. relativity of simultneity ..] Waves allow matter to appear anywhere in the 4 dimensional block universe where it happens to get decohered through the force of electromagnetism. [..]
I'm afraid that I have never read something like that... :bugeye:
According to relativity, waves cannot propagate faster than c. Perhaps you overestimate what relativity of simultaneity can do. See: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=575332
Bottom line, if you believe relativity is correct, quantum "weirdness" is a necessary result. Without wave-particle duality and quantum indeterminacy, relativity would have to be wrong. With it, it works like a charm.

Please help me understand why the above has been proven to be incorrect.

I'm searching for experimentally proven facts to blow this "understanding" out of the water!
First how SR works (and how it does not work) should be understood, and next the issue that "EPR" had with entanglement. And then Bell's theorem. After that, you could search for discussions about Bell inequality experiments end so.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
314
Views
18K
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Replies
84
Views
4K
Replies
46
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
916
Replies
109
Views
8K
Back
Top