Aggie Branczyk 🦋Dec 23, 2022

Q15 (part A): What is your main reason for NOT favoring the many worlds interpretation?

A: The notion of multiple worlds seems too farfetched

B: The notion of multiple minds seems too farfetched

C: The interpretation is too complex compared to others - i.e. Ockham's razor

D: The interpretation is unable to explain the Born rule

E: It can never be corroborated experimentally

F: Other (leave a comment)

#Quantum #QuantumFoundations #QuantumMechanics #QuantumComputing

A: The notion of multiple worlds seems too far...
0%
B: The notion of multiple minds seems too far...
0%
C: The interpretation is too complex compared...
28.6%
SEE REPLY TOOT FOR MORE OPTIONS
71.4%
Poll ended at .
Show threadAggie Branczyk 🦋Dec 23, 2022

Q15 (part B): What is your main reason for NOT favoring the many worlds interpretation?

A: The notion of multiple worlds seems too farfetched

B: The notion of multiple minds seems too farfetched

C: The interpretation is too complex compared to others - i.e. Ockham's razor

D: The interpretation is unable to explain the Born rule

E: It can never be corroborated experimentally

F: Other (leave a comment)

#Quantum #QuantumFoundations #QuantumMechanics #QuantumComputing

D: The interpretation is unable to explain the Bor
20%
E: It can never be corroborated experimentally
20%
F: Other (leave a comment)
20%
SEE ABOVE TOOT FOR MORE OPTIONS
40%
Poll ended at .
Show threadMike Smith

@AggieBranczyk

Amateur take here. Based on everything I've read, I actually think many-worlds is the least wrong option, so I voted SEE REPLY and SEE ABOVE so I can see the results at the end.

Why "least wrong"? Because we don't know what we don't know. If Everett is right, it might be right in much the same way Copernicus was right, in that his model still had enormous conceptual issues, but was the least wrong option in 1543.

Excellent poll!

Dec 24, 2022 at 12:14amWeb