home | what's new | other sitescontact | about

 

 

Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity


 

Quantum Mechanics

Scientific American says there is one basic difference between Copenhagen and the other competing QM interpretations

 


 

return to "Quantum Mechanics" main-page

 

 

Editor's prefatory comment:

The following information was introduced in the preceding article on “the 20+ interpretations of QM.” However, the central issue is so important that it needs to be highlighted.

That central issue has to do with the nature of the wave function: Is it a mathematical construct, mere information, or is it something “real” in the 3-D world? The competing versions speaking against Copenhagen assert that the wave function is a real entity.

To better understand the debate, one will need a working knowledge of the definition of “wave function.”

 

 

Scientific American: "In some respects the decision between a Copenhagenist and an Everettian [Many Worlds] viewpoint boils down to a basic question: Is the wave function real or is it just information? If it is 'real'—in some sense the universe really consists of quantum waves propagating around—then one tends to be driven to an Everettian viewpoint... But if the wave function is just information," just a math equation, then Copenhagen is bolstered.

 

 

Editor's last word: