news 
After 100 years of quantum mechanics, it’s astonishing to realize that physicists still can’t agree on anything. In commemoration of the 100th anniversary of modern quantum mechanics, a survey was conducted with 1,101 physicists to gauge their views on some of the most contentious topics in quantum theory. The results are quite surprising as they reveal a stunning lack of consensus among experts.
As we mark this important milestone, a century-old discussion about Heisenberg’s Umdeutung paper sparked heated debates that laid the foundation for more empirically verifiable versions of quantum mechanics. While it is often debated whether the paper should have been “burned” instead of being “completed,” the outcome was a radical shift in our understanding of reality.
To commemorate this anniversary, Nature asked 1,101 physicists to offer their thoughts on the most intensely debated topics in the field. Surprisingly, the survey showed that experts hardly agree on any particular view, and more than half are often unsure about their answers. While there is some agreement on two points: the importance of a physical interpretation of quantum math (86%) and the notion that quantum theory itself will eventually be replaced by a more comprehensive theory (75%), the debate rages on.
It appears that no clear majority emerged for any particular approach to resolving the measurement problem, which revolves around the uncertainty principle in superposition. The most popular response, with 36%, was the Copenhagen interpretation, a straightforward method where quantum worlds are distinct from classical ones and particles gain properties only when measured by an observer in the classical realm.
Detractors of this approach have scathingly referred to it as the “shut up and calculate” method, as it occasionally glosses over intricate details for more practical applications – which, to be fair, is remarkably powerful for developments like quantum computing. On the other hand, more than half of respondents who chose the Copenhagen interpretation confessed they were not too confident in their answers, dodging follow-up questions asking them to elaborate.
In fact, more than 64% of participants demonstrated a “healthy following” of several radical viewpoints, such as information-based approaches and many worlds. Meanwhile, about 16% of respondents submitted written answers that either rejected all options or proposed personalized interpretations on the subject matter.
Despite this division among experts, there’s no denying that the survey reflects the lively nature of the field and its fast-paced development – a lack of consensus doesn’t necessarily equate to bad science.
Source: gizmodo.com
