From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uchinews!spssig.spss.com!markrose Wed Feb 26 12:53:37 EST 1992
Article 3926 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uchinews!spssig.spss.com!markrose
>From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: QM nonsense
Message-ID: <1992Feb21.234609.61337@spss.com>
Date: 21 Feb 92 23:46:09 GMT
References: <66636@netnews.upenn.edu> <437@tdatirv.UUCP> <66994@netnews.upenn.edu>
Organization: SPSS Inc.
Lines: 10
Nntp-Posting-Host: spssrs7.spss.com

In article <66994@netnews.upenn.edu> weemba@libra.wistar.upenn.edu 
(Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>My point is, this is a theoretical/philosophical issue.  Radical Copenhagen
>will explain the experiments as well as radical Many Worlds as well as Path
>Integrals as well as a dozen or so other interpretations.

Are Path Integrals part of Feynman's interpretation?  If so, could you
sketch how it differs from the Copenhagen interpretation, radical or not?
(I remember Feynman dismissing waveform collapse as "magic", but he didn't
go into much detail in the book I was reading.)


