On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 3:11 PM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote:

> On 11-05-2022 06:06, Bruce Kellett wrote:
> > On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 1:56 PM smitra <smi...@zonnet.nl> wrote:
> >
> >> On 09-05-2022 00:34, Bruce Kellett wrote:
> >>
> >>> That still treats the SE as indubitally true. No theory in physics is
> >>> 'indubitably true'.
> >>>
> >>> The Everett program is to say that the SE is all that there is -- it
> >>> explains everything. That is clearly false (no Born rule in the SE),
> >>> so it might be wise to doubt the universal application of the SE.
> >>
> >> There is no good reason to doubt the SE without any experimental hints
> >> that it breaks down, or any good theoretical reasons why it is
> >> likely to break down in some regime.
> >
> > Such faith would be touching if it weren't so naive. There are good
> > theoretical and experimental reasons to believe that it cannot be the
> > whole story.
> >
> As John Clark has also mentioned, the opposite is true. There are no
> good arguments for collapse theories. There are no experimental hints
> for real collapse

That depends on how you read the data. We only see one outcome for each
experiment, after all!

> and if we argue based on theory, then we see that it
> leads to many problems.

The SE also has many problems., as I have taken pains to point out.


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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 

Reply via email to