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 7 years, 11 months
14 profile views
Last seen May 9 at 9:13
- Mathematics 4.9k 4.9k 11 gold badge1818 silver badges5858 bronze badges
- Computer Science 3.9k 3.9k 1818 silver badges5353 bronze badges
- Philosophy 2.8k 2.8k 1616 silver badges3535 bronze badges
- Theoretical Computer Science 2.1k 2.1k 1212 silver badges4242 bronze badges
- MathOverflow 1.7k 1.7k 1414 silver badges3232 bronze badges
- View network profile →
Top network posts
- 49 What are some very important papers published in non-top journals?
- 30 How did first-order logic come to be the dominant formal logic?
- 26 On Mathematical Arguments Against Quantum Computing
- 25 Proof refutation: Amateur reviews of ambitious CoRR papers
- 23 Mathematical research interrupted by a war
- 18 Is there an O(n log n) algorithm for 4D line simplification?
- 18 Why are mathematician so interested to find theory for solving partial differential equations but not for integral equation?
- View more network posts →