- #1
Cruikshank
- 82
- 4
Does anyone know of a psychological study done of the various people who take different positions in the debates about interpretation of quantum mechanics? I mean something that would analyze the philosophical reasons for the arguments, and the emotional drives that might lead physicists to take one or another viewpoint. In a sense, I am looking for a definition of interpretation, as well as an understanding of what elements an interpretation *must* have to satisfy various people.
Note I do *not* want to hash through the Einstein Bohr debate for the millionth time. I want to know *why they were arguing in the first place.* Please do not reiterate "Einstein thought QM was right but incomplete"-- I want to know *why* he thought it incomplete, and what would qualify as "complete." I know that they spent decades trying to work that out, but since there are a plethora of interpretations out there, has anyone done a study of what drives these people?
Note I do *not* want to hash through the Einstein Bohr debate for the millionth time. I want to know *why they were arguing in the first place.* Please do not reiterate "Einstein thought QM was right but incomplete"-- I want to know *why* he thought it incomplete, and what would qualify as "complete." I know that they spent decades trying to work that out, but since there are a plethora of interpretations out there, has anyone done a study of what drives these people?