A century on, physicists still disagree on what quantum mechanics actually means. Nature recently surveyed more than a thousand researchers, asking about their views on the interpretation of quantum mechanics. When broken down by career stage, the results show that a diversity of views spans all generations.
The Copenhagen interpretation remains the most widely held view, placing the act of measurement at the core of quantum theory well into the 2020s. Epistemic or QBist approaches, where the quantum state expresses an observer’s knowledge or belief, form the next most common group, followed by Everett’s many-worlds framework, in which all quantum outcomes continue to coexist without collapse (CERN Courier July/August 2025 p26). Other views maintain small but steady followings, including pilot-wave theory, spontaneous-collapse models and relational quantum mechanics (CERN Courier July/August 2025 p21).
Fewer than 10% of physicists surveyed declined to express a view. Though this cohort purports to include proponents of the “shut up and calculate” school of thought, an apparently dwindling cohort of disinterested working physicists may simply be undersampled.
Crucially, confidence is modest. Most respondents view their preferred interpretation as an adequate placeholder or a useful conceptual tool. Only 24% are willing to describe their preferred interpretation as correct, leaving ample room for manoeuvre in the very foundations of fundamental physics.
