On: Willow, Our Quantum Chip

[whimsicalism]

the everettian view is absolutely not the view? i am not so sure.

or you mean specifically the parallel computation view?

[wasabi991011 → whimsicalism]

In my opinion the "shut up and calculate" view is the most common among actual quantum computing researchers.

Unsure about those working on quantum foundations, but I think the absence of consensus is enough to claim any view as absolutely not the view.

[whimsicalism → wasabi991011]

i don’t really view “shut up and calculate” or very restrained copenhagenism as a real view at all.

i think if you were to ask people to make a real metaphysical speculation, majority might be partial to everett - especially if they felt confident the results were anonymous

[wasabi991011 → whimsicalism]

I agree, but that kind of goes to my point:

I believe the vast majority of researchers in quantum computing* spend almost no time on metaphysical speculation,

*Well, those on the "practical side" that thinks about algorithms and engineering quantum systems like the Google Quantum AI team and others. Not the computer science theorists knee-deep in quantum computational complexity proofs nor physics theorists working on foundations of quantum mechanics. But these last two categories are outnumbered by the "practical" side.

[spookie → whimsicalism]

Seeing to believe is indeed a view, as they would have to view it in order to believe!

[gaze → whimsicalism]

sorry -- the results don't add weight to one view or the other. The interpretations are equivalent.

[whimsicalism → gaze]

not metaphysically equivalent. also, i’m not so certain it will always be untestable. i would have thought the same thing about hidden variables but i underestimated the cleverness of experimentalists

[DennisP → whimsicalism]

I think "experimentally equivalent" is what GP meant, and as of today, it holds true. Google's results are predicted by other interpretations just as well as by Everett. Maybe someday there will be a clever experiment to distinguish the models but just "we have a good QC" is not that.

[whimsicalism → DennisP]

i think you're arguing against a point i never made in any of my comments