Which interpretation of quantum mechanics will be accepted by 2030

1.1kṀ2494

2030

Many-worlds interpretation

0.4%

Copenhagen interpretation

0.1%

Many-worlds interpretation (but other worlds are 'not real')

Quantum informational

68%

No consensus

The Krantz interpretation (fractally consistent modulated clusters)

All know quantum phenomena will be described by a new theory.

13%

Other

Resolves to one if it is universally accepted (except a tiny fringe), otherwise is weighted based on something believable as to the current state of thinking, like something published in quanta magazine for example. Close date updated to 2030-01-01 12:00 pm

Get

1,000

to start trading!

People are also trading

By the beginning of 2035, will physicists and philosophers mostly agree on the correct interpretation of quantum mechanics?

11% chance

Will relational quantum mechanics become the consensus view by the end of 2040?

9% chance

Rule 30 involved in a computational explanation of quantum mecanics by 2040 ?

12% chance

Will the scientific community accept aspects of quantum consciousness by 2030? 🧠🔬⚛️🌀

11% chance

Practical relationship between thought and quantum mechanics found and used by 2050

16% chance

Will a theory of everything (a theory that unites relativity and quantum mechanics) be found in physics by 2040?

47% chance

Will a theory of everything (a theory that unites relativity and quantum mechanics) be found in physics by 2040?

25% chance

Will we know if gravity is fundamentally quantum by the end of 2030?

20% chance

Will quantum advantage be demonstrated for practical quantum chemistry problems before 2030?

26% chance

In what year will quantum advantage be demonstrated for practical quantum chemistry problems? (before 2030)

Sort by:

"So I am both dead and alive like Schrödinger's cat?" "You always was" 🔫

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation#Debate_whether_the_other_worlds_are_real I think it is a philosophical issue as to whether the other worlds are 'real'. Copenhagen requires a "collapse" of the wave function and this doesn't. Disclaimer: I am an armchair follower of this stuff not even studied it as an undergraduate.