army1987 comments on Ask an experimental physicist - Less Wrong

35 Post author: RolfAndreassen 08 June 2012 11:43PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (294)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vaniver 10 June 2012 07:09:47PM 6 points [-]

As wedrifid says, this comment tells me that you are, regrettably, not as strong a Bayesian as I would wish many physicists were.

And your comment makes obvious that you are not a physicist, and have learned QM from someone who is not a physicist. Quick, without looking it up- what percentage of physicists subscribe to MWI? What are two alternative interpretations of QM besides Copenhagen and MWI?

Pick your side.

This is entirely the wrong attitude to have.

Comment author: [deleted] 11 June 2012 05:40:00PM 5 points [-]

Quick, without looking it up- what percentage of physicists subscribe to MWI?

I'm a physicist and I wouldn't know that myself. Especially because I seem to recall different surveys giving vastly different results.

Comment author: Vaniver 11 June 2012 05:57:44PM 2 points [-]

Sure! The approach is the informative part, and I should have worded my post better to make that clearer. Something along the lines of "why do you believe that many physicists reject MWI for those reasons?" would have been less confrontational and probably more communicative.