WereKitten on 26 September 2011
| Dr.Grass said: Then, after struggling through all of it for some years it becomes clear that there is no interpretation (as you suggest above) where there is more information we just don't know about and QM could be considered deterministic. IT CAN'T. QM is a strange thing, but it works incredibly well and no one really knows why. ... |
Well, obviously there's no such thing as a completely deterministic interpretation of cookie-cutter QM, but
- hidden variable theories are not completely out, though Kochen-Specker's theorem or Aspect's verification of Bell's inequalities violation pose serious limitation on which of such theories can be admitted.
- there's work e.g. by Adler or t'Hooft to develop a classical deterministic layer of physics under the currently known QM, of which QM is an effective higher level. A bit like classical deterministc (micro-)dynamics exhibits classical statistical mechanic as an epiphenomenon.
Both fall under the "there's more information we don't know about" umbrella, but both require new physics.
