Copenhagen Interpretation or Many Worlds Interpretation?

Question

Wave Collapse Theory. Which do you think is more plausible?

Answer 1

Hi Kath

The important thing to remember about Copenhagen and Many Worlds interpretation is that they are *Interpretations* of QM. This means that they should not be (and at present are not) experimentally distinguishable.

In other words: quantum mechanics is a very good predictive system. The major problem with it is that it doesn't make classical sense to us. How does one go about understanding the strange (but unarguably accurate) results the numbers give us? What physicists have tried to do is come up with a consistent explanation for the theory, or, if you like, a story behind the numbers. You can do QM without a story at all: just use the numbers (sometimes this is called "quantum cookery", because you're just following the recipe!). Or you can add a story to help make more meaning for yourself.

Because of all this you are absolutely free to choose and use whichever Interpretation makes the most sense to you. At school you're normally taught the Copenhagen interpretation first because it's the traditional or default interpretation. People usually stumble on Many Worlds through a pop science book. Usually they will then misunderstand it. ;o)

My own opinion: I think Copenhagen is largely nonsensical and confusing. I think Many Worlds is too prone to misunderstanding. I prefer the transactional interpretation developed by Wheeler and Feynman, a bit more technical but more satisfying because it accounts for both retarded and advanced solutions. probably the best thing you can do is develop your own quantum intuition by doing as many practice problems and as much quantum thinking as you can.


Hope this helps!
The Chicken

Answer 2

Many Worlds Interpretation "sounds" plausible, but is it?

Many Quantum physists reject the idea.

There a few other theories floating around, whether or not they are plausible, that is up to your interpretation.