[AndrewDucker]

It should be noted that Many Worlds doesn't even make the top two when quantum physicists are asked for their favoured explanation: https://archive.ph/k8BYs

And yet I keep seeing people comparing it with Copenhagen, as if they were the only two explanations.

[lavelganzu]

Excellent chart on that page. Hurrah for asking their degree of confidence! The plurality of respondents had low confidence, of course, as scientists should pending some experimental reason to prefer one interpretation over another.

For those who don't click through:

- It's a Nature news feature from July 2025, including responses from 1100 people with papers in quantum physics

- 36% preferred the Copenhagen interpretation, and nearly half of those indicated "not confident"

- 17% epistemic theories, 15% many-worlds, 7% Bohm-de Broglie pilot wave theory

- small percentages for various others including "none"

- additional charts for related questions

[unparagoned]

The Copenhagen interpretation isn’t coherent and has untestable postulates around wavefunction collapse.

Everett’s interpretation has postulates that have been well established and tested and its much more likely to be true.

Plus it’s not like is a popularity test. Some surveys of different populations of physicists do have it taking higher.