3 ms·
I think you are abusing language here, probably not intentionally, and it distracts from the actual issue. You seem to understand the difference but for those w
by tpfour 8y ago
I think you are abusing language here, probably not intentionally, and it distracts from the actual issue. You seem to understand the difference but for those who don't, here's a crucial distinction that's often overlooked by laypeople:
The Schrödinger (Dirac) equation itself is deterministic. Given a wavefunction at time t=t0, you can calculate its evolution to time t=t1. What is indeterminate is the observation of the observable. The distribution of observations is entirely determined. Only the result of a single observation is indeterminate: in the limit of infinite measurements, you would get the probability distribution back which itself is determinate. The various "interpretations" concern themselves with what happens at the time of measurement. For example, the Copenhagen interpretation says that the wavefunction, which was evolving deterministically, mutates into a new wavefunction which itself evolves deterministically. This act of going from one to the other is considered indeterminate and is given the name of "collapse". However the dynamics of each wavefunction is entirely determinate.