Re:Physicists provide support for retrocausal quantum theory
by mikeash on Thursday July 06, 2017 @11:02AM
(#14710914)
He might say that, but so what? It's clear that he favors many-worlds, but that doesn't mean the rest of us have to. My point is that he's attempting to prove many-worlds by assuming that none of the other explanations are true, i.e. he's begging the question.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Physicists provide support for retrocausal quantum theory
by ridewinter on Thursday July 06, 2017 @11:23AM
(#14711081)
Well the other explanations say that the atom doesn't really exist, it's just an abstraction. And many-worlds says the atom does exist, and this is why you see these quantum effects. That's a meaningful difference.
Re:Physicists provide support for retrocausal quantum theory
by mikeash on Thursday July 06, 2017 @11:29AM
(#14711129)
I'm pretty sure that's not what the other explanations say at all.
Re:Physicists provide support for retrocausal quantum theory
by BoiledCabbage on Friday July 07, 2017 @12:41AM
(#14716113)
Pilot Wave is to Many Worlds, as Many Worlds is to Copenhagen.
Pilot wave is the most "concrete". If you're moving away from abstraction, then why stop at Many Worlds?