B isn’t true at all. If you look at something like Ballentine’s ensemble interpretation, its pretty clear thats minimal. Remember the stylized fact- quantum mechanics is a response to:
we can’t successfully predict outcomes to every experiment
we can always predict distributions to classes of experiments.
Ballentine tells us- no worries, wavefunctions are tools used to predict probability distributions. There is no wave function collapse, you’ve just sampled once from the predicted distribution.
Many worlds would prefer the wavefunction to represent single systems (which might be confusing map/territory) and so denies 1 (every result possible does happen.)
The idea of Ballentine’s interpretation is that the wavefunction is a tool to compute a probability distribution. Probability distributions are real. Ballentine would accuse many worlders of confusing the map (wavefunctions) for the territory.
You never predict “this is what happens when I send a photon through the slit”- instead you predict “this is what happens when i send lots of photons through a slit.” Its very much the minimal interpretation of quantum mechanics. I recommend skimming through Ballentine’s text (its a very good for many reasons- deriving the Schroedinger equation from galilean relativity, for instance).
B isn’t true at all. If you look at something like Ballentine’s ensemble interpretation, its pretty clear thats minimal. Remember the stylized fact- quantum mechanics is a response to:
we can’t successfully predict outcomes to every experiment
we can always predict distributions to classes of experiments.
Ballentine tells us- no worries, wavefunctions are tools used to predict probability distributions. There is no wave function collapse, you’ve just sampled once from the predicted distribution.
Many worlds would prefer the wavefunction to represent single systems (which might be confusing map/territory) and so denies 1 (every result possible does happen.)
Sampling mechanism, please.
If it isn’t “They’re all real, and we just feel one of them”, then it’s adding something big—a whole new dynamical principle.
If it IS “They’re all real, and we just feel one of them”, then hey, it’s just MWI with another name.
The idea of Ballentine’s interpretation is that the wavefunction is a tool to compute a probability distribution. Probability distributions are real. Ballentine would accuse many worlders of confusing the map (wavefunctions) for the territory.
You never predict “this is what happens when I send a photon through the slit”- instead you predict “this is what happens when i send lots of photons through a slit.” Its very much the minimal interpretation of quantum mechanics. I recommend skimming through Ballentine’s text (its a very good for many reasons- deriving the Schroedinger equation from galilean relativity, for instance).