• Stuka@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah it tends to be difficult to disprove fantasy when its proponents don’t care about evidence.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Right, Roger Penrose and Eugene Wigner and a host of other physicists who subscribe/d to consciousness collapse interpretations aren’t people who care about evidence…

      It’s wild how many people are so quick to be confidently incorrect about something that sounds correct and science-ish but doesn’t at all reflect the actual subspecialty nuances.

      Literally none of the QM interpretations have evidence supporting their particular interpretation.

      At best there’s a handful that have been abandoned due to falsification, like interpretations predicated on local hidden variables.

      There’s no more evidence for Copenhagen or many worlds than there is for consciousness collapse.

      There’s simply different inherent assumptions that different physicists are willing to entertain, but it’s entirely a personal choice and ultimately not evidence driven.

      And the picture of assumptions changes over time. For example, post-2018 all popular interpretations other than many worlds have a new “pick at least one of three” assumptions that must be embraced following a new paradox. But currently that’s pretty much the only guiding factor, is what assumptions one is willing to entertain.

      • Stuka@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sure thing, go ahead and pretend conscious collapse theories hold any ground in modern day physics.

        They don’t. But you keep believing the religion-eske fantasy that you’re a special being who magically influences things.

        It’s crackpot, particularly your flavor claiming retroactive consciousness collapse 🤣