Shouldn't a frequentist lean towards many-worldery?
I am not sure a frequentist would like outcomes (worlds) which cannot be counted (and if one performs a [naive] counting the results are wrong on top of it) ...
Fair enough! So which way should the frequentist tend between 'shut up and calculate' and 'the wave function really collapses'? Or no necessary preference?
'real collapse' is problematic too, so this may leave the frequentist with 'shut up and continue to think about it some more' for now 8-)
Post a Comment