[QUOTE=ultrafilter]
I think you’re misunderstanding the point Chronos is making. There’s absolutely no way to tell using QM which of the various interpretations is “right”. You can start with any one of them, work out the math, and you’ll end up with exactly the same theory.
[/QUOTE]
That’s one of the reasons why actually proving one interpetation to be true would be a major discovery.
[QUOTE=Stranger On A Train]
The whole business of different interpretations is a great way for physicists to pass an otherwise quiet evening at the coffeehouse, but as Chronos notes, any real approach to QM involves dispensing with concerns about why it works and focusing on the mathematics, which do work…even when they’re not strictly mathematically self-consistant, as with renormalization in QFT.
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps; but then scientists used to say the same thing about atoms and electrons, that they might as well be regarded as mathematically abstractions and that we’d never be able to actually prove they existed.
And while I don’t recommend it, there actually is an amusing way to prove the Many Worlds Interpetation. Build a device that will destroy the world, or at least humanity; if the MWI is true, it won’t work, because only the worlds where something goes wrong with it will still have anyone alive to notice. Every time you try to use it, something will go wrong, because in the worlds where it worked, there’s nobody left to notice. It has to be something that will either kill everything or not work at all, to weed out middle results. And, of course if the MWI is wrong, no one will be around to care. Not an idea original to me BTW.
[QUOTE=Chronos]
And Der Trihs, there is one other thing that current science says about FTL travel: Anything that can be used for FTL travel can be used as a time machine as well, and vice-versa. The standard line of reasoning rejects time travel because of the possibility of paradox, and then rejects FTL because it allows time travel. But yes, if we ever figure out a way to resolve the paradoces and do it, that’ll be pretty revolutionary.
[/QUOTE]
I’m aware of that, which is why I think it should be looked at more. I’ve noticed over the years physicists repeatedly coming up with ideas for FTL and/or time travel, and others proving those ideas impossible or impractical, but never actually proving the whole idea impossible. I’m reminded of the days before the laws of thermodynamics were formulated, when perpetual motion devices were considered a far out but not impossible thing; as opposed to now, when just about any physicist will dismiss the idea out of hand because it violates the laws of thermodynamics.
I strongly suspect that there’s some sort of basic physical law(s) that would rule out FTL/timetravel, and finding it might well be a revolution, although of what magnitude there’s no way to tell. And of course, if FTL/time travel is possible that would be a huge one.
Also, it has been pointed out that the Many Worlds Interpetation can handle time travel without paradoxes; the time traveller just splits off a new branch.
