On 6/6/2020 7:48 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:


On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 11:29:02 AM UTC-6, Brent wrote:



    On 6/6/2020 5:13 AM, Philip Thrift wrote:


    On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 6:10:46 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote:


        On 5 Jun 2020, at 23:36, Philip Thrift <[email protected]>
        wrote:


        ref (article by Jim Baggott):

        
https://medium.com/@MassimoPigliucci/the-copenhagen-confusion-611f31cc27e1
        
<https://medium.com/@MassimoPigliucci/the-copenhagen-confusion-611f31cc27e1>


        https://twitter.com/philipcball/status/1268950876405850112
        
<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fphilipcball%2Fstatus%2F1268950876405850112&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHyoDxbukkDIr-ioIp_UjGFzLHeIg>

        Jim Baggott Retweeted
        Philip Ball @philipcball
        ·
        "The “collapse of the wavefunction” was never part of the
        Copenhagen interpretation because the wavefunction isn’t
        interpreted realistically." I have been trying to get this
        point across for ages; I really hope Jim has more success.

        Quote Tweet

        Jim Baggott @JimBaggott
        No, the Copenhagen interpretation does not entail the
        collapse of the wavefunction.

        Then, if I look at a spin in the 1/sqrt(2) (up + down), with
        a {up, down} measuring device, I am myself in a superposition
        state, if the wave does not collapse.
        Non collapse entails many world, or better many dreams. In
        that case there is no collapse, but also no waves needed, as
        it has to be explained by 2+2=4 & Co.

        Bruno




    The best comment by a physicists (Associate Professor, Monash
    University) in the discussion thread:


    The wavefunction is not a physical thing - so whether it
    collapses is irrelevant.


    At least one physicist not  brainwashed into the current religion.

    Baggott and also Hosenfelder seem to be endorsing an epistemic
    interpretation like QBism, but they don't directly discuss the
    problems with it.

    Brent


Can you list some of these problems? AG

It makes the wave-function a description of personal knowledge of the system according to the PBR theorem https://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3328

Brent

--
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2b50e90e-eb6c-3910-9967-0528df18a612%40verizon.net.

Reply via email to