Pilot waves are not a theory. No experiment can exclude them, unless it falsifies the entire quantum theory of mechanics. One reason to dislike pilot waves is

Pilot waves are not a theory. No experiment can exclude them, unless it falsifies the entire quantum theory of mechanics. One reason to dislike pilot waves is that people, speaking as scientists, take them too seriously. This is not to say that scientists shouldn't talk about them, just that we shouldn't pretend we're doing science when we do. In particular, don't pretend that anyone can be scientifically right or wrong about the human interface to quantum mechanics. Some interfaces cause fewer errors than others do, and the rest is Vi and Emacs. Speaking subjectively, there are two reasons that I prefer Everett's relative state interpretation. (It's the serious version of the approach that these slides send up as many worlds.) Relative states make it blatantly obvious why I can't put a contract on my great-great-grandfather. In other approaches, you have to think about this. In the pilot wave "theory", there are superpositions, a.k.a. "pilot waves", and a bunch of other things. In the Everett worldview, by contrast, there are superpositions, full stop. Everett does leave some grey areas, roughly speaking the quantum version of, "Is 7 a random number?" I doubt that any interpretation of quantum mechanics can clarify that, and Everett at least acknowledged the problem and made it fairly explicit.