If anyone shows you Minkowskian spacetime and asks why they should adopt your weird epistemology when there’s all these perfectly natural invariants to use,
Reversing the direction of the analogy, what are the “invariants” of MWI? A natural, emergent multiversal basis? nah. A natural, emergent Born’s law? Nah...
or asks you what it would even mean for everyone to have a private reality, yell at them that the universe as a whole clearly can’t have an objective state of motion because there’s nothing else it could be moving relative to.
That’s actually a perfectly reasonable argument.
Basically, Special Relativity only you’d rather give up the attempt to describe a coherent state of affairs than give up on talking separately about space and time the way you’re accustomed to.
rQM is coherent, observers can’t make contradictory observations. It just isn’t objective. It also isn’t anything-goes
philosophical subjectivism. It is an interpretation that agrees with all the results of the formalism, like any interpretation properly so called, so it does not break anything or make anything unscientific.
Reversing the direction of the analogy, what are the “invariants” of MWI? A natural, emergent multiversal basis? nah. A natural, emergent Born’s law? Nah...
That’s actually a perfectly reasonable argument.
rQM is coherent, observers can’t make contradictory observations. It just isn’t objective. It also isn’t anything-goes philosophical subjectivism. It is an interpretation that agrees with all the results of the formalism, like any interpretation properly so called, so it does not break anything or make anything unscientific.