Re: What Next?
Willie Wong <wwong@...
2006-02-02 16:04:42 GMT
You know, you've been going on and on about the Copenhagen
interpretation as if there's no hope at all for SQM. Are you not aware
of the myriad other interpretations of quantum mechanics?
When I was studying the subject, there has been a growing student
following of Everett Many World, and now, as a mathematician, I prefer
to not worry about it and adopt a stance much like Fuch's formal
The Copenhagen Interpretation is not, contrary to what you think,
quantum mechanics. It is a way of connecting the mechanical steps of
calculation in QM with physical phenomenon. There are plenty of
physicists subscribing to SQM yet loathing the Copenhagen
You posted some time ago about how you felt the need to discredit SQM
to fend off us attackers of Millsian theory; criticizing the
Copenhagen Interpretation is not the way to go. You are attacking a
*philosophy* of science rather than the science itself. These whole
long thread of posts about the Copenhagen interpretation, in my
opinion, has rather little to do with either the validity of CQM or
the validity of SQM, and thus is very off-topic.
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 09:36:39PM -0000, john_e_barchak wrote: