The Bohm Interpretation Of Quantum Mechanics Is Probably False

Rational were you high when u wrote that last round? Cuz lol you had to be. Ohhh god. Support For Bohm Mechanics In The Scientific Community This sh1t doesn't matter. Physicsts study physics assumign non realism. the methodolgy assumes quantum space-time which doent exist. They all asume to work toward a greater theory, this assumes anti reductionism which is wat science is based on. The methodoloy of the avarage quantum physicsist assuems science is flawed. Rats arugmentI agree wit premise 1.Premise 2 a.k.a where the Sh1t goes wrongwhere u get ur weed from? Silk road? They got some good sh1t there but dont be high and write argumetns k? Bohm is a hidden varriabe theory. hidden varriabe theory.HiddenYou cant have an experiment to disprove bohm because then it wont be a hidden varriable theory. Premise one contradicts premise tow bc u cant ever know if there is not something hidden.Bohm's mechanics do not assume naive realismNaive realism is "For various reasons, after the discovery of quantum mechanics it quickly became almost universal to speak of an experiment associated with an operator A in the manner just sketched as a measurement of the observable A — as if the operator somehow corresponded to a property of the system that the experiment in some sense measures. It has been argued that this assumption, which has been called naive realism about operators, has been a source of considerable confusion about the meaning and implications of quantum theory" From Pro's (7) sourceBohm say observer is irrelevent. Spin of a particle shows this"This occurs because the Stern-Gerlach magnets are so designed and oriented that a wave packet (a localized wave function with reasonably well defined velocity) directed towards the magnet will, by virtue of the Schrödinger evolution, separate into distinct packets — corresponding to the spin components of the wave function and moving in the discrete set of directions. The particle itself, depending upon its initial position, ends up in one of the packets moving in one of the directions."The spin of particle is dependent on intinal position not an observer. No naive realismThere are non local hidden variablesWe gots non locality this is proved with quantum entanglement. All particle has a non local connection. Yes entanglement stats with a superposition which is a hidden variable bc it hides which state a system is in (1)(2). Wow this mean quantum entanglement shows there ARE non local hidden variables. No other interpreation is true and correctLocal hidden variables got f*cked by John bell. Bell's theorem made einstiens wet dream a fiction (3). Many physicsts are now jizzing themselves cuz they have a random theory of QM called the copenhagen (because Neils Bohr would chew some copenhagen when workin on it). Copen says sh1ts all random. They all say Born's rule can calculate where particle go by intensitty of the wave (amplitude^2). Born's rule got sh1t on by Guang-Liang Li and Victor O. K. Li.Born's probability explanation of the wave function is incorrect due to a false assumption on "continuous probabilities" in modern probability theory. "Continuous probability" means a "probability measure" that can take every value in a subinterval of the unit interval (0, 1). We prove that such "continuous probabilities" are invalid. (4) Ratman got pwnedSmoke it up, 420(1) Griffiths, David J. (2004), Introduction to Quantum Mechanics (2nd ed.), Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-111892-7 (2) Brian Greene, The Fabric of the Cosmos, p. 11(3)https://en.wikipedia.org... (4) http://arxiv.org...;