News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics. Parent comment

Re:The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics by whatshisface on Sunday March 19, 2023 @10:15PM (#35226446)
I am referring to the fact that it is possible for indeterminacy to be an absolute fact and not a temporary artifact of incomplete development.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics by goldenkey on Monday March 20, 2023 @05:26AM (#35229115)
I can make that an axiom of my system. It'll cause explosion and is a next to useless system but it's still a system.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics by GoblinSlayer on Monday March 20, 2023 @07:40AM (#35230123)
Why though? MWI works just fine.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics by whatshisface on Monday March 20, 2023 @01:39PM (#35235431)
So does Copenhagen. That's why you can't choose between them.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics by GoblinSlayer on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @01:59AM (#35242958)
Didn't you say you can't tell whether randomness is true or due to incomplete interpretation? If Copenhagen is incomplete, then it doesn't work, only its one part works - the Schrodinger equation.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics by whatshisface on Tuesday March 21, 2023 @02:37PM (#35250516)
MWI doesn't allow you to predict what you will end up observing, so it is just as incomplete.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Origin Story Behind the 2022 Nobel Prize in Physics by GoblinSlayer on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @02:00AM (#35257353)
It doesn't predict collapse if that's what you mean, because collapse doesn't happen, but it predicts that the result of observation is eigenvalue, and the prediction is consistent and matches observation.
[ Parent | on HN ]