- #71
Fredrik
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 10,877
- 422
They don't of course. Apparently we disagree about what a "route to the predictions" would be. I would say that since the calculation of a prediction is independent of whether the person doing the calculation prefers the CI or the MWI, the "routes to the prediction" are exactly the same.Maui said:Why? The MWI and the copenhagen interpretation both propose very different routes to classicality. How do they change the formalism?
I would not say that the route to the prediction is different in a given interpretation, unless the definition of the interpretation starts with a reformulation of QM using a different set of assumptions. For example, I don't really know the consistent histories approach, but it seems to me that its supporters are using the ABL rule as an assumption instead of the Born rule. This could be considered a different route to the predictions.
A non-mathematical assumption added on top of QM that doesn't change the theory's predictions can't be proved wrong by experiments.Maui said:QM is certainly intact but the assumption is hard to support for the experiments cited earlier.
Last edited: