Well, I'd strongly disagree with Hossenfelder's contention that "what this math is about has remained unclear" (see e.g. the links in here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19315457 ) but then there is this:
> A phenomenologist myself, I am agnostic about different interpretations of what is indeed the same math, such as QBism vs Copenhagen or the Many Worlds. But I agree with the philosopher Tim Maudlin that the measurement problem in quantum mechanics is a real problem – a problem of inconsistency – and requires a solution.
It's inconsistent to claim to be be agnostic about interpretation and at the same time believe that the (big) measurement problem is a real problem. Whether it's a real problem or not is interpretation-dependent. See e.g. https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/17/11/7374/htm
1 comment
[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 16.3 ms ] thread> A phenomenologist myself, I am agnostic about different interpretations of what is indeed the same math, such as QBism vs Copenhagen or the Many Worlds. But I agree with the philosopher Tim Maudlin that the measurement problem in quantum mechanics is a real problem – a problem of inconsistency – and requires a solution.
It's inconsistent to claim to be be agnostic about interpretation and at the same time believe that the (big) measurement problem is a real problem. Whether it's a real problem or not is interpretation-dependent. See e.g. https://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/17/11/7374/htm