3 ms·

I thought that would be one of the QM textbooks that are mostly wrong according to your vision of physics and probability: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books

by kgwgk 4y ago

I thought that would be one of the QM textbooks that are mostly wrong according to your vision of physics and probability: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/introduction-to-quantum-optics/F45DCE785DC8226D4156EC15CAD5FA9A https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/introduction-to-quantum... Or maybe you could give an example of what textbooks are we talking about...

ThomPete 4y ago
Well given I am a proponent of the Everett interpretation I would say any textbook that talks about quantum wave collapse.
- kgwgk 4y ago
  See? That's why they don't deserve a Nobel prize!
  - ThomPete 4y ago
    You don't get a nobel price for truth. You get a nobel price for significant contributions to the field you are in. Those can be wrong, plenty of noble price winners have been wrong.