All interpretations of QM make the same predictions, so if “satisfying locality” is an empirically meaningful requirement, they are all equivalent.
But locality is more than one thing, because everything is more than one thing. Many interpretations allow nonlocal X where X might be a correlation ,but not an action or a signal.
Yeah, it’s not empirically meaningful over interpretations of QM (at least the ones which don’t make weird observable-in-principle predictions). Still meaningful as part of a simplicity prior, the same way that e.g. rejecting a simulation hypothesis is meaningful.
All interpretations of QM make the same predictions, so if “satisfying locality” is an empirically meaningful requirement, they are all equivalent.
But locality is more than one thing, because everything is more than one thing. Many interpretations allow nonlocal X where X might be a correlation ,but not an action or a signal.
Yeah, it’s not empirically meaningful over interpretations of QM (at least the ones which don’t make weird observable-in-principle predictions). Still meaningful as part of a simplicity prior, the same way that e.g. rejecting a simulation hypothesis is meaningful.