XPost: sci.physics.relativity   
   From: g@crcomp.net   
      
   Bill Sloman wrote:   
   > Ross Finlayson wrote:   
   >>   
   >>    
   >>   
   >>> If quantum mechanics is never wrong:   
   >>> if it's not a continuum mechanics   
   >>> you're doing it wrong.   
   >>   
   >> The whole point about quantised effects is that they aren't continuous.   
   >   
   > Have you have of "deBroglie-Bohm"? Basically their ideas   
   > (or, mostly Bohm) about "real wave collapse" about the usual   
   > quantum formalism the Heisenberg-Scroedinger piucture: make   
   > for a different than the usual Copenhagen interpretation of   
   > quantum mechanics ("It's..., random") that it's not random   
   > and it's not discontinuous, instead since continuum mechanics.   
   >   
   > Often enough that was called "hidden variables", then the word   
   > "hidden variables" was publicly shamed, so these times sometimes   
   > it's called "supplementary variables", though, people who stuck   
   > by their own idea of why nature's perfection would demand a   
   > continuum mechanics still have it often enough "hidden variables"   
   > to reflect on Bohm's origins of the ideas and not give it to   
   > the old-wrapped-as-new sort who didn't have to stand up for anything.   
      
   Bohr's self-serving Solvay shaming was situationally swept into the ash   
   heap of history:   
      
       Truth by fiat   
       the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics   
      
       Authors   
      
       Álvaro Balsas Universidade Católica Portuguesa (UCP)   
       A. LUCIANO L. VIDEIRA Universidade de Évora   
      
       ... [A simplistic version] according to which all the   
       foundational points of QM had been adequately and   
       definitely addressed by Bohr at the V Congress of   
       Solvay - does not fit together with what effectively   
       happened there. As a matter of fact, three of its   
       most prominent participants - Einstein, Schrödinger   
       and de Broglie - remained forever utterly convinced   
       that the outlook proposed by Bohr was wide off the   
       mark of presenting an adequate (and much less   
       definitive) representation of quantum   
       phenomena: Einstein never accepted the completeness   
       of the formulation coming out from the Copenhagen-   
       Göttingen axis, and, eight years later, would fire   
       off an attack, known as the EPR argument, which,   
       notwithstanding Bohr's prompt attempts to   
       neutralize it, continues to be argued and commented   
       about ever since: Schrödinger maintained his   
       unwavering belief in a realistic interpretation of   
       his wave-mechanics; de Broglie, after the 1927   
       Congress of Solvay has abandoned his pilote-wave   
       theory (a simplified version of his early theory of   
       the double solution) converted himself to Bohr's   
       views; however, he went back to his theory of the   
       double solution once David Bohm gave it quite a   
       positive boost with his two introductory articles   
       on hidden variables.   
      
       (excerpt)   
      
          
      
   --   
   73, Don, KB7RPU                                           veritas    _|_   
                                                             liberabit   |   
   https://www.qsl.net/kb7rpu                                vos         |   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)