- #1
Ghost117
- 50
- 3
Hi all,
I would like some thoughts on the following quote I read from a book on the history of QM: "Quantum: Einstein, Bohr, And the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality." Please restrict your consideration to the Bohr/Heisenberg 'Copenhagen' interpretation (I realize in other interpretations, the wavefunction is real and/or there is no collapse):
"The Copenhagen interpretation requires an observer outside the universe to observe it, but since there is none - leaving God aside - the universe should never come into existence, but remain forever in a superposition of many possibilities. This is the long-standing measurement problem writ large. Schrodinger's equation that describes quantum reality as a superposition of possibilities, and attaches a range or probabilities to each possibility, does not include the act of measurement. There are no observers in the mathematics of quantum mechanics." p357
Is the quote above from the author an accurate implication of the Copenhagen interpretation? Or has the author missed something? (His bio states that he has degrees in physics and philosophy, and the book has very good reviews.)
Thanks
I would like some thoughts on the following quote I read from a book on the history of QM: "Quantum: Einstein, Bohr, And the Great Debate About the Nature of Reality." Please restrict your consideration to the Bohr/Heisenberg 'Copenhagen' interpretation (I realize in other interpretations, the wavefunction is real and/or there is no collapse):
"The Copenhagen interpretation requires an observer outside the universe to observe it, but since there is none - leaving God aside - the universe should never come into existence, but remain forever in a superposition of many possibilities. This is the long-standing measurement problem writ large. Schrodinger's equation that describes quantum reality as a superposition of possibilities, and attaches a range or probabilities to each possibility, does not include the act of measurement. There are no observers in the mathematics of quantum mechanics." p357
Is the quote above from the author an accurate implication of the Copenhagen interpretation? Or has the author missed something? (His bio states that he has degrees in physics and philosophy, and the book has very good reviews.)
Thanks