Status Updates From What Is Real?: The Unfinish...

Trying realllllllly hard to remember all those physics classes… feeling very gif of Patrick’s brain replugging and all the cobweb covered cogs start grinding

how personalities and human biases shape scientific practice, paradigms

Everett's multiverse found support from cosmology: inflation and string theory both insisted on multiverse

remaining problem's with Everett's interpretation: role of probability, unfalsifiability

a case against falsifiability is provided

makes me want to look for jobs in quantum foundations

recognition of Bell's work and its practical implications in cryptography.

spontaneous collapse to explain wave function collapse. wf collapses spontaneously randomly and seem to happen more likely when the wf is entangled with a lot of particles, like during measurement. Also explains why macroscopic systems do not present superposition states

Works of John Clauser, Abner Shimony on exp. of Bell's inequality. Dieter Zeh's rediscovery, improvement of multiverse interpretation and the coinage of the term decoherence. Alain Aspect's refinement of CHSH exp.

Varenna summer school - woodstock of quantum foundation dissidents. Epistemological letters their medium to discuss and refine ideas.

Book's opening quote makes much more sense now with Aspect's story.

positivism's death initiated by Kuhn

The setting of this paradigm shift: Bohm's interpretation is disparaged, falsely assuming validity of Neumann's proof, Bell's inequality is stuck in editorial limbo, Ervett's multiverse is not even in the radar.

Positivism seem have taken a hydra like existence, nebulous, unclear an din many forms. Instrumentalism, operationalism, logical positivism etc...

John Bell's inequality.

Didn't know that he worked with a simplified version of EPR paper, introduced by Bohm. Bohm sounds more and more like an unsung hero at this point

Hugh Evrett's multiworld interpretation of quantum physics.

Universal wave function for the entire world. This concept is not insisted as much as the branching of universes in textbooks for laity

Science doesn't enforce freedom of speech to be honest. It's all running on a "attention-seeking" behaviour that Evrett was not interested in

Bohm's interpretation of quantum physics.

Particle waves surfing on top of pilot waves. It's this interpretation, that suggested even classical big objects possess quantum nature to it, though minuscule to be observed.

is de Broglie wavelength wrongly named after?

Pity Bohm's interpretation is not taught in any current curriculum. Hard to digest such ostracisation happened recently.

Copenhagen interpretation, supported by Bohr, Heisenberg, Jordan, did not have a united front.

Bohr looks more and more like a charlatan.

Heisenberg's total lack of character at the face of defeat in the atomic bomb race.

Migration of scientist mecca due to the war encouraged the positivistic nature of quantum physics.

Company mindset is not compatible for fundamental questions in science.

Logical positivists, from the Vienna circle, influenced a lot the origin of quantum physics. This ideology of anything outside measurements is meaningless explains the nature of Copenhagen interpretation very much.