3 ms·
I'm not a physicist and I don't really have an opinion there, but that's funny. One side argues that pushing multiverse is unscientific, while other side argues
by garaetjjte 6y ago
I'm not a physicist and I don't really have an opinion there, but that's funny. One side argues that pushing multiverse is unscientific, while other side argues exactly the opposite, that pushing Copenhagen is unscientific.
https://www.lesswrong.com/s/Kqs6GR7F5xziuSyGZ/p/xsZnufn3cQw7tJeQ3 https://www.lesswrong.com/s/Kqs6GR7F5xziuSyGZ/p/xsZnufn3cQw7...
- 8bitsrule 6y agoDifferent physicists will have different preferred ways of explaining (interpreting) observations. Given the same observations, competing theories/interpretations/models will arise. How to choose between those that don't conflict with any of the evidence? A famous scientist, Arthur Eddington, did a lot of work on what he called 'Fundamental Theory', an attempt at unifying everything. It went over 'like a submarine with screendoors'. After I'd looked through the book for a couple of hours, I asked a seasoned quantum theoretician if there was anything particularly wrong about it. 'No'. Then why hadn't I heard of it, why didn't anyone take it seriously? 'Because they didn't like it.'