On 11-05-2022 07:42, Brent Meeker wrote:
On 5/10/2022 9:47 PM, smitra wrote:
On 11-05-2022 06:06, Bruce Kellett wrote:
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
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
The Everett program is to say that the SE is all that there is --
explains everything. That is clearly false (no Born rule in the
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
that it breaks down, or any good theoretical reasons why it is
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
That's complete and audacious question begging. What you mean by
"real" is "modeled within the SE". There is NOTHING BUT collapse
experimentally; every result recorded in every notebook and every tape
is evidence of a collapse.
There is effective collapse in experiments we do, but the experiments
nevertheless demonstrate that the fundamental processes proceed under
unitary time evolution.
and if we argue based on theory, then we see that it leads to many
problems. Believing in collapse is like believing in the ether after
special relativity was already formulated and experimentally
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 view this discussion on the web visit