Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 at 5:57:38 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 9 Jun 2020, at 02:27, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 9:39:30 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> On 7 Jun 2020, at 13:25, Lawrence Crowell >> wrote: >> >> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 9 Jun 2020, at 02:27, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 9:39:30 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > >> On 7 Jun 2020, at 13:25, Lawrence Crowell > > wrote: >> >> On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 5:25:23 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> As for Hossenfelder's fav

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 8 Jun 2020, at 23:47, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > On 6/8/2020 7:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >>> On 7 Jun 2020, at 12:39, Philip Thrift >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 5:16:33 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Monday, June 8, 2020 at 9:39:30 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 7 Jun 2020, at 13:25, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 5:25:23 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: >> >> >> As for Hossenfelder's fav quantum mechanics semantics, she has stated >> many times on her

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On 6/8/2020 7:13 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 7 Jun 2020, at 12:39, Philip Thrift > wrote: On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 5:16:33 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: But collapsing or not remains relevant, to make sense of the behaviour of single particle, or

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 7 Jun 2020, at 13:55, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 6:25 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > > Superdeterminism is typically discarded swiftly in any discussion of > quantum foundations. > > Yes, and Superdeterminism is swiftly discarded for a

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 7 Jun 2020, at 13:25, Lawrence Crowell > wrote: > > On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 5:25:23 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: > > As for Hossenfelder's fav quantum mechanics semantics, she has stated many > times on her blog, it's superdeterminism. > > https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.06462

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 7 Jun 2020, at 12:39, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > > On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 5:16:33 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > But collapsing or not remains relevant, to make sense of the behaviour of > single particle, or more generally to get some meaning of the relative > probabilities,

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 10:00:41 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 10:01 AM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > >> Yes, and Superdeterminism is swiftly discarded for a very good reason. >>> Occam's razor says the best physics theory that explains the facts is the >>> one that's

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 6:56:04 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 6:25 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > > *Superdeterminism is typically discarded swiftly in any discussion of >> quantum foundations.* > > > Yes, and Superdeterminism is swiftly discarded for a very good

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 10:01 AM Philip Thrift wrote: >> Yes, and Superdeterminism is swiftly discarded for a very good reason. >> Occam's razor says the best physics theory that explains the facts is the >> one that's simplest, but that doesn't just mean the one that has the >> simplest laws but

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 6:56:04 AM UTC-5, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 6:25 PM Philip Thrift > wrote: > > > *Superdeterminism is typically discarded swiftly in any discussion of >> quantum foundations.* > > > Yes, and Superdeterminism is swiftly discarded for a very good

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 6:25 PM Philip Thrift wrote: > *Superdeterminism is typically discarded swiftly in any discussion of > quantum foundations.* Yes, and Superdeterminism is swiftly discarded for a very good reason. Occam's razor says the best physics theory that explains the facts is the

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 5:25:23 PM UTC-5, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > As for Hossenfelder's fav quantum mechanics semantics, she has stated many > times on her blog, it's superdeterminism. > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.06462 > > > "A superdeterministic theory is one which violates the

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Sunday, June 7, 2020 at 5:16:33 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > But collapsing or not remains relevant, to make sense of the behaviour of > single particle, or more generally to get some meaning of the relative > probabilities, experimentally, or in arithmetic. > > Bruno > There

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 7 Jun 2020, at 04:58, 'Brent Meeker' via Everything List > wrote: > > > > 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

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 6 Jun 2020, at 14:13, 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 > >> wrote: >> >> >> ref (article by Jim Baggott): >> >> >>

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 9:48:45 PM UTC-5, 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

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

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 wrote:

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

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 wrote: >> >> >> ref (article by Jim Baggott): >> >>

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

As for Hossenfelder's fav quantum mechanics semantics, she has stated many times on her blog, it's superdeterminism. https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.06462 "A superdeterministic theory is one which violates the assumption of Statistical Independence (that distributions of hidden variables are

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

Il 6 giugno 2020 alle 14.13 Philip Thrift ha scritto: 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

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

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 > wrote: ref (article by Jim Baggott): https://medium.com/@MassimoPigliucci/the-copenhagen-confusion-611f31cc27e1

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

In some ways this is a no-brainer. The Copenhagen interpretation is ψ-epistemic which means there is fundamentally no wave function. The occurrence of eigenstates or their eigenvalues under certain operators in a measurement is then something that really has no collapse because the wave

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 8:13 AM Philip Thrift wrote: > *The wavefunction is not a physical thing - so whether it collapses is > irrelevant.* If the wavefunction is not a physical thing then it's just a useful calculating device. OK fine, but there are times, such as when an observation is made,

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Friday, June 5, 2020 at 3:36:43 PM UTC-6, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > ref (article by Jim Baggott): > > > https://medium.com/@MassimoPigliucci/the-copenhagen-confusion-611f31cc27e1 > > > https://twitter.com/philipcball/status/1268950876405850112 > > Jim Baggott Retweeted > Philip Ball

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 6:10:46 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 5 Jun 2020, at 23:36, Philip Thrift > > wrote: > > > ref (article by Jim Baggott): > > > https://medium.com/@MassimoPigliucci/the-copenhagen-confusion-611f31cc27e1 > > >

Re: The semantics of quantum mechanics, Copenhagen style

> On 5 Jun 2020, at 23:36, Philip Thrift wrote: > > > ref (article by Jim Baggott): > > > https://medium.com/@MassimoPigliucci/the-copenhagen-confusion-611f31cc27e1 > > > https://twitter.com/philipcball/status/1268950876405850112 >