Superposition or Many-worlds interpretation?

ripcurl1016
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Just wondering what you guys think about the results of the double slit experiment...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With waves it is easy to understand, but what is "waving"? We're stuck with particles because that is what we detect, but what are they? The QM description works, but we really don't know what's going on.
 
So when unobserved, particles are waves of potential, but when observed they become particles. Superposition makes sense in the fact that it would be a single wave of possible potentials to exist and come to a definte existence when observed. And the many-worlds interpretation would just take superposition and separate the superpositioned states into different dimensions...I don't know which one sounds crazier.
 

Thread 'Violation of Bell Inequality with unentangled photons'

I would like to know the validity of the following criticism of one of Zeilinger's latest papers https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.07756 "violation of bell inequality with unentangled photons" The review is by Francis Villatoro, in Spanish, https://francis.naukas.com/2025/07/26/sin-entrelazamiento-no-se-pueden-incumplir-las-desigualdades-de-bell/ I will translate and summarize the criticism as follows: -It is true that a Bell inequality is violated, but not a CHSH inequality. The...
View full post »

Thread 'Question about discussions around quantum interpretations'

I understand that the world of interpretations of quantum mechanics is very complex, as experimental data hasn't completely falsified the main deterministic interpretations (such as Everett), vs non-deterministc ones, however, I read in online sources that Objective Collapse theories are being increasingly challenged. Does this mean that deterministic interpretations are more likely to be true? I always understood that the "collapse" or "measurement problem" was how we phrased the fact that...
View full post »

Thread 'Modern View of Quantum Phenomena'

This is not, strictly speaking, a discussion of interpretations per se. We often see discussions based on QM as it was understood during the early days and the famous Einstein-Bohr debates. The problem with this is that things in QM have advanced tremendously since then, and the 'weirdness' that puzzles those attempting to understand QM has changed. I recently came across a synopsis of these advances, allowing those interested in interpretational issues to understand the modern view...
View full post »

Similar threads

I How to envision particles in superposition in Many Worlds presplitting
Replies
7
Views
2K
I Bohmian interpretation of Schrodinger's Cat
Replies
11
Views
2K
I What is the true nature of worlds in the Many-Worlds Interpretation?
Replies
11
Views
3K
I Many worlds and interference
Replies
4
Views
1K
I Can Decoherence Explain the Many Worlds Interpretation?
Replies
18
Views
3K
I Elitzur–Vaidman bomb tester in multi-world interpretation
Replies
21
Views
4K
I Does the photon in a double slit experiment create many worlds?
Replies
20
Views
3K
I Doubts regarding my interpretation of Wigner’s Friend Scenario
Replies
21
Views
3K
I David Deutsch's Many Worlds Interpretation and the Double Slit Experiment
Replies
4
Views
5K
I In the many worlds interpretation, how do the worlds join?
Replies
16
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top