Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Inference International Review of Science

Not So Real

Sheldon L. Glashow

Published Oct 19, 2018• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

On the interpretation of quantum mechanics: Sheldon Lee Glashow reviews What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics by Adam Becker.
DOI
10.37282/991819.18.43

Related papers

Copenhagen Interpretation Delenda Est?

Christopher A. Fuchs

This is a slightly extended version of a review of Adam Becker's book What is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics, to appear in American Journal of Physics. The key addition is the reference list.

arXiv:1809.05147•Sep 13, 2018•3 citations

The quantum heretics

Iain Dale-Trotter

What is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics , by science writer Adam Becker, features all the usual suspects but it isn't just any old account of quantum's first century. The perspective is shifted.

Physics World•Dec 1, 2018•0 citations

Review: (1) Quantum Philosophy: Understanding and Interpreting Contemporary Science; (2) Understanding Quantum Mechanics

James Ladyman

Metascience•Jan 1, 2001•0 citations

Science AMA Series: I’m Adam Becker, astrophysicist and author of WHAT IS REAL?, the story of the unfinished quest for the meaning of quantum physics. AMA!

Adam-Becker, r/Science AMAs

Hi, I’m Adam Becker, PhD, an astrophysicist and science writer. My new book, What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics, is about the scientists who bucked the establishment and looked for a better way to understand what quantum mechanics is telling us about the nature of reality. It’s a history of quantum foundations from the initial development of quantum mechanics to the present, focusing on some people who don’t often get the spotlight in most books on quantum history: David Bohm, Hugh Everett III, John Bell, and the people who came after them (e.g. Clauser, Shimony, Zeh, Aspect). I’m happy to talk about all of their work: the physics, the history, the philosophy, and more. FWIW, I don’t subscribe to any particular interpretation, but I’m not a fan of the “Copenhagen interpretation” (which isn’t even a single coherent position anyhow). Please don’t shy away if you disagree. Feel free to throw whatever you’ve got at me, and let’s have a fun, engaging, and respectful conversation on one of the most contentious subjects in physics. Or just ask whatever else you want to ask—after all, this is AMA. Edit, 2PM Eastern: Gotta step away for a bit. I’ll be back in an hour or so to answer more questions. Edit, 6:25PM Eastern: Looks like I’ve answered all of your questions so far, but I’d be happy to answer more. I’ll check back in another couple of hours. Edit, 11:15PM Eastern: OK, I’m out for the night, but I’ll check in again tomorrow morning for any final questions.

•May 1, 2018•0 citations

Quantum mechanics and the nature of physical reality

Jim Baggott

What is the wave function? Is it real? What kind of physical interpretation should it be given? Straight answers to these questions are not available.

Journal of Chemical Education•Aug 1, 1990•5 citations

How can it be like that?

Jeffrey Bub

Richard Feynman famously said that nobody understands quantum mechanics and cautioned against asking: "But how can it be like that?" Something about the conceptual foundations of the theory is profoundly puzzling, but just what is so disturbing is not easy to pin down. Three books by Olival Freire (The Quantum Dissidents), Adam Becker (What is Real?), and Philip Ball (Beyond Weird) are about rival attempts to say how it can be like that and, in the case of the Freire and Becker books, about the hostility between opposing camps, which sometimes had devastating consequences for the professional careers of the protagonists. I review the issues raised in the three books, and I discuss what Bohr could have meant by the statement (attributed to Bohr by Aage Petersen) that "there is no quantum world," along the lines of a neo-Bohrian, non-representational interpretation of quantum mechanics. (Originally published, with minor changes, as a review article "Interpreting the quantum world: old questions and new answers.")

arXiv:2302.00084•Jan 31, 2023•0 citations
Hi, I’m Adam Becker, PhD, an astrophysicist and science writer. My new book, What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics, is about the scientists who bucked the establishment and looked for a better way to understand what quantum mechanics is telling us about the nature of reality. It’s a history of quantum foundations from the initial development of quantum mechanics to the present, focusing on some people who don’t often get the spotlight in most books on quantum history: David Bohm, Hugh Everett III, John Bell, and the people who came after them (e.g. Clauser, Shimony, Zeh, Aspect). I’m happy to talk about all of their work: the physics, the history, the philosophy, and more. FWIW, I don’t subscribe to any particular interpretation, but I’m not a fan of the “Copenhagen interpretation” (which isn’t even a single coherent position anyhow). Please don’t shy away if you disagree. Feel free to throw whatever you’ve got at me, and let’s have a fun, engaging, and respectful conversation on one of the most contentious subjects in physics. Or just ask whatever else you want to ask—after all, this is AMA. Edit, 2PM Eastern: Gotta step away for a bit. I’ll be back in an hour or so to answer more questions. Edit, 6:25PM Eastern: Looks like I’ve answered all of your questions so far, but I’d be happy to answer more. I’ll check back in another couple of hours. Edit, 11:15PM Eastern: OK, I’m out for the night, but I’ll check in again tomorrow morning for any final questions.
Richard Feynman famously said that nobody understands quantum mechanics and cautioned against asking: "But how can it be like that?" Something about the conceptual foundations of the theory is profoundly puzzling, but just what is so disturbing is not easy to pin down. Three books by Olival Freire (The Quantum Dissidents), Adam Becker (What is Real?), and Philip Ball (Beyond Weird) are about rival attempts to say how it can be like that and, in the case of the Freire and Becker books, about the hostility between opposing camps, which sometimes had devastating consequences for the professional careers of the protagonists. I review the issues raised in the three books, and I discuss what Bohr could have meant by the statement (attributed to Bohr by Aage Petersen) that "there is no quantum world," along the lines of a neo-Bohrian, non-representational interpretation of quantum mechanics. (Originally published, with minor changes, as a review article "Interpreting the quantum world: old questions and new answers.")