Date: May 24, 2013 4:29 PM
Author: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Can an indetectable thing physically exist? (in principle)

On 5/24/13 12:32 PM, David Bernier wrote:
> Suppose (for example) that wave function
> collapse in the "standard"/standard interpretation
> of Quantum Mechanics was governed by absolutely
> indetectable things.
>
> An indetectable thing is one that's even more discreet
> than neutrinos: it doesn't interact at all with the world.
>
> Does it make sense to postulate (as a thought experiment),
> the physical existence of indetectable things?
>
> David Bernier
>


Wolfgang Pauli postulated around 1930 the existence of a neutrino
to explain how beta decay could conserve energy, momentum, and
angular momentum.

Nothing had been detected and was to remain the case for several more
years. Did the idea make sense? Well yes, but it could have been
wrong. Later it turned out to be right.