For a long time, I wanted to understand quantum mechanics. Then I grew older and learned other things which are badly counterintuitive. I also learned that the Copenhagen interpretation is no longer the last word, which I find quite comforting. (That comfort was based on the book Understanding Quantum Mechanics by Roland Omnès. I now know that it described the consistent histories interpretation, which doesn't really contradict the Copenhagen interpretation.) The Copenhagen interpretation itself is actually not as bad as I thought, but sadly many presentations mix it up with an interpretation proposed by Eugene Wigner that Wigner himself later retracted.
Member for 9 years, 9 months
18 profile views
Last seen 13 hours ago
- Mathematics 6.8k 6.8k 11 gold badge2020 silver badges6565 bronze badges
- Computer Science 5.2k 5.2k 2121 silver badges5858 bronze badges
- Philosophy 3.9k 3.9k 1919 silver badges3737 bronze badges
- Theoretical Computer Science 3k 3k 1515 silver badges4343 bronze badges
- MathOverflow 2.4k 2.4k 1717 silver badges3535 bronze badges
- View network profile
Top network posts
- 50 What are some very important papers published in non-top journals?
- 32 How did first-order logic come to be the dominant formal logic?
- 30 Proof refutation: Amateur reviews of ambitious CoRR papers
- 28 On mathematical arguments against Quantum computing
- 23 Mathematical research interrupted by a war
- 20 Why is it worth spending time on type theory?
- 20 Is anyone aware of a counter-example to the Dharwadker-Tevet Graph Isomorphism algorithm?
- View more network posts →