Find your ideal quantum interpretation

In Summary,Quantum mechanics can be interpreted in many ways, but the one that best suits your personality is the statistical ensemble interpretation.
  • #141
PeterDonis said:
Yes, and in the context of this thread, it means that, per the directions given in the OP, everyone should use their own intuitive judgment about what is "real" when answering the questions in the flow chart. Arguing over different definitions doesn't appear to be getting anywhere.

As I mentioned it didn't get Turing and Wittgenstein anywhere. I do not think we will do any better. All I will add is physicists despite the esoteric areas they investigate tend to side with Turing , as do I - but that's just a personal preference.

Thanks
Bill
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #142
PeterDonis said:
But this makes no difference unless it ends up leading to some known interpretation that isn't on the chart. The instructions in the OP already tell you to interpret each question according to your own intuition;

All right! Then I end up with the step “Copenhagenish interpretations” when it is "allowed" to subsume the instrumentalist minimal interpretation under this term.

[EDIT]
Rationale: I don't trust questions and intuitions which "attempt" to infuse the quantum world with a spurious concreteness (classical concepts) for ease of imagination.
 
Last edited:
  • #143
vanhees71 said:
Only those not accepting the very facts we learned from the discovery of quantum theory that Nature is probabilistic have a problem here.
I think one should say "Nature is probabilistic without counterfactuals" or something similar. Just "Nature is probabilistic" isn't enough to get Bell Inequalities.

Note: This isn't a disagreement with the minimal statistical view, I just think it's a more accurate summary of it.
 
  • #144
DarMM said:
Just "Nature is probabilistic" isn't enough to get Bell Inequalities.

Yep, "The nature is probabilistic" is a metaphysical statement that is irrelevant to physics.

We use probabilities to talk about correlation, and it turns out that the violation of Bell's inequalities shows that quantum correlations have no equivalent in classical physics.

/Patrick
 
  • #145
Demystifier said:
I'm just trying to understand what does he mean by "real".
Well, I was just asking what the meaning of "the wave function exists" was. It is funny that now I have to explain what the meaning of real is (as in "the manifold is real")! Perhaps those that want me to answer whether I think that the manifold is real should say what they mean by real. Or even better, those that say that the manifold is real should explain what they mean by that.
 
  • #146
A. Neumaier said:
A field is a mathematical notion. Thus your division is as arbitrary as the one you criticise!
Not only mathematical. Even in mathematics it can mean different things.
 
  • #147
To me, the
martinbn said:
It seems to me that "real" means the same thing as it does to you, with one difference. You have decided to take one of the mathematical notions, the manifold, away from the rest such as the probabilities, coordinates, hamiltonians and so on, and group it with the physical entities, the fields and the particles. And call it real.

But a field is by definition a function of a manifold. I don't know how a field can be real without the manifold being real. What is a field without a manifold?
 
  • #148
vanhees71 said:
The very formalism of QT rests on probabilistic interpretation(s) of the state ##\hat{\rho}##, and indeed to calculate the probability for the outcome of an (ideal) measurement you need to use the (generalized) eigen basis of the operator representing the measured. That's within the formalism of QT not subject to the arbitrariness of any representation. What you measure is determined by the measurement appatus used to measure the observable you want to measure. There's nothing mysterious in this.

But what makes a measurement apparatus a "measurement apparatus"? It's either because it helps me (personally) to know what the value of some variable is, or it is because a measurement apparatus amplifies microscopic variables so that they make a macroscopic difference. Either way seems very subjective to me.
 
  • #150
After consideration by the moderators, the thread will remain closed.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba
<h2>1. What is a quantum interpretation?</h2><p>A quantum interpretation is a theoretical framework that explains the behavior and properties of quantum systems. It attempts to make sense of the strange and counterintuitive phenomena observed in the quantum world, such as superposition and entanglement.</p><h2>2. Why is it important to find an ideal quantum interpretation?</h2><p>Finding an ideal quantum interpretation is crucial for understanding the fundamental nature of reality at the quantum level. It can also have practical applications in fields such as quantum computing and quantum information processing.</p><h2>3. How many different quantum interpretations are there?</h2><p>There is no consensus on the exact number of quantum interpretations, but some of the most well-known ones include the Copenhagen interpretation, the many-worlds interpretation, and the pilot-wave theory. There are also various hybrid and alternative interpretations that combine elements from different theories.</p><h2>4. What are the criteria for an ideal quantum interpretation?</h2><p>The criteria for an ideal quantum interpretation may vary depending on individual preferences and beliefs. However, some common criteria include coherence with experimental evidence, simplicity, and the ability to make accurate predictions about quantum phenomena.</p><h2>5. How close are we to finding the ideal quantum interpretation?</h2><p>The search for an ideal quantum interpretation is an ongoing and evolving process. While some interpretations have gained more acceptance and support from the scientific community, there is still no consensus on which one is the "correct" interpretation. As our understanding of quantum mechanics continues to advance, we may get closer to finding the ideal interpretation, but it is also possible that we may never have a definitive answer.</p>

1. What is a quantum interpretation?

A quantum interpretation is a theoretical framework that explains the behavior and properties of quantum systems. It attempts to make sense of the strange and counterintuitive phenomena observed in the quantum world, such as superposition and entanglement.

2. Why is it important to find an ideal quantum interpretation?

Finding an ideal quantum interpretation is crucial for understanding the fundamental nature of reality at the quantum level. It can also have practical applications in fields such as quantum computing and quantum information processing.

3. How many different quantum interpretations are there?

There is no consensus on the exact number of quantum interpretations, but some of the most well-known ones include the Copenhagen interpretation, the many-worlds interpretation, and the pilot-wave theory. There are also various hybrid and alternative interpretations that combine elements from different theories.

4. What are the criteria for an ideal quantum interpretation?

The criteria for an ideal quantum interpretation may vary depending on individual preferences and beliefs. However, some common criteria include coherence with experimental evidence, simplicity, and the ability to make accurate predictions about quantum phenomena.

5. How close are we to finding the ideal quantum interpretation?

The search for an ideal quantum interpretation is an ongoing and evolving process. While some interpretations have gained more acceptance and support from the scientific community, there is still no consensus on which one is the "correct" interpretation. As our understanding of quantum mechanics continues to advance, we may get closer to finding the ideal interpretation, but it is also possible that we may never have a definitive answer.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
7
Views
524
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
8
Views
431
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
11
Replies
370
Views
9K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
6
Replies
179
Views
11K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
4
Replies
120
Views
6K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • Quantum Interpretations and Foundations
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Back
Top