Copernhagen Interpretation

 

Many World Interpretation

 

Pilot Wave Interpretation

 

Time Reversibility

 

Transactional Interpretation

 

Other ->

after reading the links you PM`d me, I`de have to vote "Other", to me it just seems that we don`t have a full understanding of the nature of photons.

 

all the rest is pure speculation, maybe one of them is correct? maybe non are? but they ALL say that we just DON`T know

 

 

OTHER for me

Same here.

I like the Copernhagen interpretation, but only because it appeals to me, not because of any sort of evidence.

 

Wheeler's delayed choice experiment is a bit creepy though

Wheelers would certainly "explain" alot of phenomenon if it were to be correct, everything from telepathy to telekinetics and I`m sure some relious events caused by "God" from the "will" of the persecuted people, the list`s endless really

 

I`ll stick with what I know and what I don`t know, at least any part can be proven/disproven descisively

Excuse me guys, but, what is a school of thought?

it`s another expression to say "Way of thinking"

Could you please (one of you who knows) give a quick little sentence defining each? I've probably heard them all before at some point, I just don't recognize them by name.

Other

Could you please (one of you who knows) give a quick little sentence defining each? I've probably heard them all before at some point, I just don't recognize them by name.

 

Yeah, it makes it pretty complex not to know what each one means

Yeah, it makes it pretty complex not to know what each one means

 

Not so much I do know what each means, but I don't know how they have been labeled. I would guess that the "many worlds" one is the one that says each action creates a seperate universe for all the possible consequences. The "time reversibility" I would think is the one that says if the universe stops expanding and starts compressing, time will run in reverse and everything will play out backwards.

 

I'm open for definitions of any of the other ones, or corrections to the ones above.

See here: http://www.bottomlayer.com/bottom/basic_delayed_choice.htm

 

and then: http://higgo.com/quantum/laymans.htm

According to te descriptions, I tend to follow MWI!

I like the Copenhagen Interprtation, but Pilot Waves has this strange appeal also. It's really tough to say.

Time reversibility

after reading the links you PM`d me' date=' I`de have to vote "Other", to me it just seems that we don`t have a full understanding of the nature of photons.

 

all the rest is pure speculation, maybe one of them is correct? maybe non are? but they ALL say that we just DON`T know

 

 

OTHER for me [/quote']

 

Agree 2 a T.

 

Other.

after reading the links you PM`d me' date=' I`de have to vote "Other", to me it just seems that we don`t have a full understanding of the nature of photons.

 

all the rest is pure speculation, maybe one of them is correct? maybe non are? but they ALL say that we just DON`T know

 

 

OTHER for me [/quote']

 

Interesting post. Feynman texbook "Lectures on Physics" is replete with sayings like" We just don't know" hundreds of them. Afte a bit I began to believe him. Those that idolze RF are bowing to a confessed idiot. No I am not over reacting.

Either Bohm or Feynman.

 

I'd flip a coin but the outcome might not be reliable.

Same here.

Same here.

__________________

Dave

Mathematics Forum Moderator

 

"The only thing wrong with immortality is that it tends to go on forever." - Herb Caen

 

"The reason Mother Nature included time in her creation was so everything wouldn't happen all at once." Anon.

Since we are talking QM:s way of inteperating it.. I'll definatly have a go with Bhor! i love Feynman: but in some of his theorys is just too spaced out just like MW...

Down from that i'll have some coines bet on String theory...

Interesting post. Feynman texbook "Lectures on Physics" is replete with sayings like" We just don't know" hundreds of them. Afte a bit I began to believe him. Those that idolze RF are bowing to a confessed idiot. No I am not over reacting.

you may have point IF I`de ever said that I`de read any of his stuff, fact is, I haven`t ever

 

my reply was purely personal opinion, and not based on any biased teaching(s) from others, I for one Personaly don`t know or understand everything about the Photon. my post still stands!

Time Reversibility.

 

I think Feynman was essentially on target, except for separating time and space into separate axes. If you visualize time/space as a Mobius, the Diagram makes grand sense and is elegant.