3 ms·
You can say that the only thing that exists is the quantum wave function, as what basically this paper says (particles are epiphenomena). That is basically ha
by platz 8y ago
You can say that the only thing that exists is the quantum wave function, as what basically this paper says (particles are epiphenomena). That is basically hard-line Everettianism e.g. many worlds. There are still problems. QFT does not explain gravity very well either.
The paper claims "it's neutral on the interpretations" - it is not.
You have the most senior research professor of physics at caltech admitting there are problems still - there are of course physicists that insist they have the correct answer or interpretation - the hard part is convincing enough physicists to agree with them, which they universally do not agree.
- kgwgk 8y ago> You have the most senior research professor of physics at caltech What is the ranking of seniority of research professors at Caltech? Are you implying that a research professor is somehow better than a “regular” professor?
- hexane360 8y ago>Are you implying that a research professor is somehow better than a “regular” professor? Probably when it comes to understanding and forming opinions on cutting edge research. . .
- kgwgk 8y agoThe only reason why that particular research professor is not “just” a professor is that he was denied tenure at the University of Chicago.
- soveran 8y agoI don't think the paper assumes a many worlds interpretation.
- platz 8y agothat's what it claims, but that is the only way to make sense of "particles are epiphenomena" + "Thus the Schroedinger field is a space-filling physical field whose value at any spatial point is the probability amplitude for an interaction to occur at that point." it is saying that the only thing that exists is the quantum wave function the only theory with a hope of credibility/coherence that says the only thing that exists is the quantum wave function is many worlds.