Is the Many-Worlds Interpretation truly deterministic?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Daniel Valient
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mwi
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
121 replies · 15K views
Well, doesn't this entire debate show, how nonsensical the many-world interpretation (as most other interpretations that go beyond the minimal interpretation) are from a scientific point of view? There may be some people whose mind/consciousness split all the time, particularly those who think "interpretation" is a scientifically relevant topic :nb), but I think that the majority of people, particularly physicists who haven't already lost contact to experiments and observations in the "real world", cannot confirm such experiences with any objective confidence. We do experiments and make observations and always find one outcome (modulo uncertainties of any measurement/observation). There's nothing splitting in branches, and the only thing QT provides are probabilities for the outcome of these unique observations and measurements (unique of course always within the uncertainties any measurement has of course, and most of the experimental work is to provide adequate and objective estimates of statistical and systematic errors!). That's it. There's nothing more concerning "interpretation", and so far there's not a single observation that contradicts this point of view but to the contrary QT is confirmed with an amazing significance.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: secur and BvU
Physics news on Phys.org