I really wish we'd stop citing early quantum physicists as if they were prophets revealing wisdom from on high. A lot of what they said concerning the interpretation of quantum mechanics was Just Plain Wrong.
That's no shade on them. They had a brand-new territory with jaw-dropping implications. It's no surprise that they didn't get everything right the first time.
But when I read "Try saying that to Niels Bohr’s face!", you're citing century-old ideas as if science stopped in 1927. A lot has happened in the mean time.
The main point in rivalry between "Team Many Worlds" and "Copenhagen" interpretations is that it does not matter for any practical purpose. All of the formulas behave the same, no experiment can tell one from another. That's why it's called "interpretations" and not a "theory".
The author is really on point when they keep talking about "sport fans" analogy.
(If one day someone can come up with an experiment to tell those apart, this would be pretty exciting, and I bet they have a good shot on Nobel prize. But I am not holding my breath on that)
That's no shade on them. They had a brand-new territory with jaw-dropping implications. It's no surprise that they didn't get everything right the first time.
But when I read "Try saying that to Niels Bohr’s face!", you're citing century-old ideas as if science stopped in 1927. A lot has happened in the mean time.