Suggestion: Sub-Forum for Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics

  • Thread starter peter0302
  • Start date
In summary, a suggestion was made for a dedicated sub-forum for interpretations of quantum mechanics in order to better focus discussions and prevent them from getting derailed by unrelated topics. However, it was pointed out that distinguishing between technical and philosophical discussions can be difficult and some threads may evolve between the two. The need for a separate sub-forum was questioned and it was suggested to judge each thread on a case-by-case basis.
  • #1
peter0302
876
3
Suggestion: Sub-Forum for "Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics"

There are a very large number of posts in the Quantum Mechanics forum regarding interpretations (i.e. Copenhagen, Many-Worlds, Bohm, etc.), and I think a number of people interested in discussing interpretations of QM that are not necessarily mainstream. I feel that sometimes these discussions have gotten derailed by ardent supporters of Copenhagen without it being clear to the readers that those are just interpretative opinions like any other. Perhaps a dedicated sub-forum for Interpretations would permit people interested in that topic to focus their discussions better, and permit people who are not interested in interpretations to have a forum uncluttered by discussions that are irrelevant to them.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Those subjects can be addressed in the Philosophy Forum [a subforum in General Discussion]. In fact I had hoped that this sort of thing would gain more of a foothold there than it has.
 
  • #3
Hm. A quick parusal of posts in the philosophy forum brings up topics such as "Absolute Morality" and "Are all humans of equal value?" That's not exactly the same thing as asking a question about Bohmian mechanics or the Afshar experiment.
 
  • #4
peter0302 said:
Hm. A quick parusal of posts in the philosophy forum brings up topics such as "Absolute Morality" and "Are all humans of equal value?" That's not exactly the same thing as asking a question about Bohmian mechanics or the Afshar experiment.

No it's not, but we promise we won't complain if you raise the bar of discussion in there!
 
  • #5
LOL. Ok I'll do my best.
 
  • #6
peter0302 said:
That's not exactly the same thing as asking a question about Bohmian mechanics
You're a Queen fan too?! Alright, bring on the sound bites...
 
  • #7
peter0302 said:
There are a very large number of posts in the Quantum Mechanics forum regarding interpretations (i.e. Copenhagen, Many-Worlds, Bohm, etc.), and I think a number of people interested in discussing interpretations of QM that are not necessarily mainstream. I feel that sometimes these discussions have gotten derailed by ardent supporters of Copenhagen without it being clear to the readers that those are just interpretative opinions like any other. Perhaps a dedicated sub-forum for Interpretations would permit people interested in that topic to focus their discussions better, and permit people who are not interested in interpretations to have a forum uncluttered by discussions that are irrelevant to them.

I've been thinking about that too, but this is in fact difficult. The interpretations of quantum mechanics address a very large spectrum of intellectual activities, which go from purely technical into the highly philosophical. In as much as I sometimes feel a bit wary when I talk about things like "consciousness" in the quantum physics forums, I also feel a bit silly when writing out some mathematical technicalities in the philosophy forum. But moreover, a thread can evolve. Sometimes the OP isn't even aware that his at first technical question is in fact a matter of interpretation, or his interpretational issues are sometimes just a formal technicality. Sometimes, an initially purely technical issue evolves into interpretational matters, and vice versa. So one would have to move the thread regularly between the two forums then, and one would run into difficulties of application of forum rules doing so. Some threads go off indeed on a totally philosophical path, which in the end could be considered as purely philosophical discussions, just to come back to technical issues 10 posts later.

Unfortunately, the main (even educational) difficulty with quantum theory is still the interpretational issues ("what does the wavefunction really physically mean ?" for instance, a very natural question for someone who is starting to learn the formalism of quantum theory).

So it is not clear how to separate "interpretations/philosophy of quantum theory" from "quantum physics".
 
  • #8
Danger said:
You're a Queen fan too?! Alright, bring on the sound bites...
Galileo!
 
  • #9
vanesch said:
I've been thinking about that too, but this is in fact difficult. The interpretations of quantum mechanics address a very large spectrum of intellectual activities, which go from purely technical into the highly philosophical. In as much as I sometimes feel a bit wary when I talk about things like "consciousness" in the quantum physics forums, I also feel a bit silly when writing out some mathematical technicalities in the philosophy forum. But moreover, a thread can evolve. Sometimes the OP isn't even aware that his at first technical question is in fact a matter of interpretation, or his interpretational issues are sometimes just a formal technicality. Sometimes, an initially purely technical issue evolves into interpretational matters, and vice versa. So one would have to move the thread regularly between the two forums then, and one would run into difficulties of application of forum rules doing so. Some threads go off indeed on a totally philosophical path, which in the end could be considered as purely philosophical discussions, just to come back to technical issues 10 posts later.

Unfortunately, the main (even educational) difficulty with quantum theory is still the interpretational issues ("what does the wavefunction really physically mean ?" for instance, a very natural question for someone who is starting to learn the formalism of quantum theory).

So it is not clear how to separate "interpretations/philosophy of quantum theory" from "quantum physics".

But what you described here has nothing to do with the need to create another sub-forum. An issue involving a more technical discussion of QM fits perfectly well in the QM forum. It is when it degenerates into a more esoteric discussion of "consciousness" and "existence", etc. that isn't directly formulated in physics that it then belongs in the philosophy discussion.

I judge each of these threads on a case-by-case basis. It is often impossible to know the direction of a thread based on the OP alone. How everyone reponds to the thread dictates where it is more suitable to be in. But still, this doesn't require the creation of a separate sub-forum just to cater such a discussion.

Zz.
 
  • #10
It is when it degenerates into a more esoteric discussion of "consciousness" and "existence", etc. that isn't directly formulated in physics that it then belongs in the philosophy discussion.
I don't see many discussions like that. I see discussions such as "where is the photon before it's observed" and "why does a particle act like a wave" get responses from many people, including the "mentors," along the lines of "you shouldn't even ask that question." Frankly that's unfair because it assumes a fortiori that CI is correct and the OP, who might not realize that the question is a matter of interpretation and not accuracy, is left thinking that he's wrong.

On the other hand, I fully appreciate that there are those on there who don't think such questions are meaningful and would rather we "shut up and calculate." Separating the interprative discussions from the more practical discussions would alleviate frustrations of both camps.
 
  • #11
peter0302 said:
I don't see many discussions like that.

Of course you don't. Those threads have been moved OUT of the QM forum!

Zz.
 

1. What is the purpose of creating a sub-forum for interpretations of quantum mechanics?

The purpose of a sub-forum for interpretations of quantum mechanics is to provide a designated space for discussions and debates about the various interpretations of quantum mechanics. This can help to organize and categorize the discussions and make it easier for individuals to find information and engage in meaningful discussions.

2. How many interpretations of quantum mechanics are there?

There are many interpretations of quantum mechanics, with some estimates ranging from around ten to over twenty. Some of the most well-known interpretations include the Copenhagen interpretation, the many-worlds interpretation, and the pilot-wave theory.

3. Are all interpretations of quantum mechanics equally valid?

There is no consensus among scientists about which interpretation of quantum mechanics is the most valid. Each interpretation has its own merits and limitations, and the choice often comes down to personal preference. However, all interpretations are based on the same fundamental principles and are consistent with empirical evidence.

4. Can we ever know which interpretation of quantum mechanics is correct?

It is unlikely that we will ever have a definitive answer about which interpretation of quantum mechanics is correct. The nature of quantum mechanics is inherently uncertain and allows for multiple interpretations, making it difficult to determine which one is the most accurate. Scientists continue to explore and debate the different interpretations, but it is likely that the question will remain open-ended.

5. What are the implications of different interpretations of quantum mechanics?

The different interpretations of quantum mechanics have implications for our understanding of the fundamental nature of reality, the role of consciousness in quantum events, and the possibility of alternative universes. They can also have practical applications in fields such as quantum computing and quantum cryptography. However, the implications of each interpretation are still a topic of debate and exploration.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
11
Replies
370
Views
9K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
9
Replies
314
Views
15K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
119
Views
2K
  • Sticky
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
10
Views
720
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
1
Views
267
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Sticky
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • Sticky
  • Quantum Physics
3
Replies
70
Views
16K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
28
Views
3K
Back
Top