On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:16 AM, Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 6/18/2018 4:09 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> It will take a lot of work under his approach, but I am not aware of any >> other system proposed by anyone, which even has a chance at this. >> > > Penrose's gravity induced collapse has as good a chance as Bruno's, At least Penrose has drawn a line in the sand, which can be experimentally refuted. Though I don't see any motivation for any collapse base theory since Everett provided an account of collapse without having to assume it. (Again this is like adding appending motive demon theory, which is entirely superfluous and adds whose sole motivation is to preserve the notion of collapse as physically real rather than apparent) > and a better chance of predicting some surprising but true physics. Some > version of transactional QM also has a chance. Transactional QM is another complication of the theory, proposing things we have no evidence for to explain things which have already been explained from a much simpler theory. > And Omnes' view, summed up as, "It's a probabilistic theory, so it > predicts probabilities." > > This will be ruled out when we reach quantum supremacy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_supremacy>. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
