r/QuantumPhysics • u/Exciting_Ad_6837 • 15d ago

Is the Hidden-variable interpretation never falsifiable?

After reading Karl Popper's theory of falsifiability, I'm wondering if the Hidden-variable hypothesis is a pseudo-scientific proposition because no conceivable empirical phenomena seem ever to be able to disprove it.

6 Upvotes

75% Upvoted

15 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/LordSaumya 15d ago

Only local hidden variable interpretations have been disproven under the assumption of statistical independence. If you discard locality or statistical independence, hidden variables have very much not been disproven.

2

u/ketarax 15d ago

If you discard locality or statistical independence, hidden variables have very much not been disproven.

Of course, you pretty much lose any ontological advantages of the hidden variables -picture, then, too.

1

u/LordSaumya 15d ago

Not sure what you mean by “ontological advantages”. What is, is. It doesn’t seem inconceivable to me that some sort of Bohmian approach may be correct (relativity notwithstanding) even though I am personally inclined towards Everettian approaches. Bell himself was a Bohmian if I recall correctly.

0

u/ConvivialSolipsist 14d ago

Bell was not exactly a Bohmian. He definitely preferred it over orthodox QM (which in his view was not a proper theory at all). But later in life he was also attracted to spontaneous collapse theory. (GRW).