[SomeStupidPoint]

You mix facts about the mathematics with opinions about interpretation and philosophical positions pretty freely, and that equivocation in science communication is what puts a lot of people off QM.

Scientists are too comfortable presenting philosophical positions or opinion as fact just because it's consistent with a model.

See the split between Copengahen, MWI, and Bohmian views about how to interpret the underlying calculations.

[Florin_Andrei]

Meh. It was just an intuitive description for laypeople, not a dissertation on the differences between Copenhagen and many-worlds.

Yes, I do take sides - but only for ease of explanation. The "sides" I'm taking are not even the ones I actually prefer.

Get people started first, then they can read rigorous analyses on their own.