Which quantum interpretations survive constructor theory? (the counterfactual cosmos)

[C C]

CLOSER TO TRUTH
https://youtu.be/v2olVkidgjs

VIDEO INTRO: Chiara Marletto examines Copenhagen, Bohmian mechanics, Many Worlds, collapse theories, QBism, relational quantum mechanics, and other approaches through the lens of constructor theory. Rather than choosing a winner, she asks which interpretations are compatible with deeper physical principles...

Which quantum interpretations survive constructor theory? ... https://youtu.be/v2olVkidgjs

https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/v2olVkidgjs

[confused2]

I don't understand it it but I like it anyway..

For example, a drop of dye can dissolve in water, but the reverse transformation, the dye spontaneously clumping back together, is never observed in practice. While the microscopic laws of motion are time-reversible (meaning such a reversal is not strictly forbidden for individual trajectories, only astronomically unlikely), constructor theory reframes the question: rather than asking what will happen given initial conditions, it asks whether a constructor — a device that could reliably cause the reverse transformation and retain the ability to do so again — is possible. In constructor-theoretic terms, dissolving dye is a possible task, but its transpose is impossible: no constructor for reliably reversing the process can exist under the laws of physics, even though the underlying dynamics are time-symmetric.