[Reeses]

The dominate Copenhagen and Many Worlds interpretations of quantum mechanics are useful, but for many too magical. The Pilot Wave interpretation offers a viable conventional explanation.

[Pelham]

stayin' alive

[FatherofFive]

Heisenberg was stopped for doing 85 in a 45mph zone. The sheriff shouted “Do you know how fast you were going?” Heisenberg replied, “Yes, but I don’t know where I was.”

[mlo]

I am partial to Bohmian interpretations myself.

[I want the USA back]

A statement is either true or not true. There is no middle ground between the two.
Anyone who doesn’t accept this first principle cannot have a discussion with someone who does. About any subject.

[Yashcheritsiy]

I’ve not got a big problem with Copenhagen. Many Worlds, on the other hand, is just dopey.

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

We must not discriminate against transquarks.

[tired&retired]

Bump for Later

[SpaceBar]

I prefer the dancing angels interpretation.

[AustinBill]

All of these are tying to describe something that defies rational categorization. Copenhagen says location is indeterminate from the perspective of this frame of reference. Bohm is basically saying that location is determined but frame of reference is indeterminate. Many Worlds says all of the above, but we're only aware of one at a time.

Like geocentrism vs. heliocentrism it's not about what is "correct" but rather which results in simpler math. But since all of the maths in the quantum realm involve infinities the various interpretations are really all about which infinities one chooses to sweep under the carpet.

[BenLurkin]

I have (yet another) dumb question.

Did somebody actually do “The Experiment” as shown in that illustration?

Or is it theoretical as well?

[AdmSmith]

Why do people find this easier to understand that the Copenhagen interpretation. The only Bohmian theory that works is this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rjbtsX7twc