Almost no physicists accept his argument as mathematically valid.
If you’re talking about the Afshar experiment, Unruh demolished that convincingly. We don’t need to take it on trust that Afshar is wrong.
However, Afshar and Cramer were only ever arguing about the interpretation of the results of Afshar’s experiment, not what those results would be. It would be most unwise to rule out the transactional interpretation just because its inventor subsequently said something foolish.
See the grandparent; Cramer justified the transactional interpretation by saying that it was the only interpretation able to give the correct result for the Afshar experiment. This being wrong removes much of the claimed evidence.
Sure. I think the bottom line is that the Afshar experiment doesn’t give empirical support, or even ‘philosophical support’, to any interpretation. It’s a wild goose chase.
If you’re talking about the Afshar experiment, Unruh demolished that convincingly. We don’t need to take it on trust that Afshar is wrong.
However, Afshar and Cramer were only ever arguing about the interpretation of the results of Afshar’s experiment, not what those results would be. It would be most unwise to rule out the transactional interpretation just because its inventor subsequently said something foolish.
See the grandparent; Cramer justified the transactional interpretation by saying that it was the only interpretation able to give the correct result for the Afshar experiment. This being wrong removes much of the claimed evidence.
Sure. I think the bottom line is that the Afshar experiment doesn’t give empirical support, or even ‘philosophical support’, to any interpretation. It’s a wild goose chase.