Unfortunately I have not enough time for a full reply right now, but I will come back over the weekend.<p>Wave function and probability distribution. You repeatedly insisted on precise language, that is why I objected your statement that the wave function is a probability distribution. And I still do, nuclear physicist or not. A wave function is complex-valued, a probability distribution is usually defined by a real-valued probability density function or a real-valued cumulative distribution function. The state 1&#x2F;sqrt(2)(|0&gt; + |1&gt;) has probability amplitudes of magnitude 1&#x2F;sqrt(2) for both states, the probability distribution you obtain when you repeatedly measure particles in that state has probability 1&#x2F;2 for both states, the square of the magnitude of the amplitude. The wave function certainly defines a probability distribution but it is not itself one.<p><i>&lt;sigh&gt; I&#x27;m trying to educate you on physics, and you&#x27;re arguing pseudo-philosophical metaphysics. Please stop. Your understanding of the terms is largely wrong. As a result, your arguments are based on falsities, and therefore also wrong. Please go read a popular book about QM before discussing this with anyone. And stop arguing with the nuclear physicist. This is one situation where I can appeal to authority without it being a logical fallacy. I&#x27;ve explained repeatedly why you&#x27;re wrong. You don&#x27;t seem to understand.</i><p>I haven&#x27;t read everything again but most of your responses, especially in your last comment, simply state that I am wrong without pointing out why or providing a supposedly correct point of view. It is of course not you job to teach me physics, but simply stating that I am wrong is only of limited help to overcome misunderstandings. Besides that we are discussing a topic that has not been definitely settled and where there is disagreement even among professional physicists, so maybe we should not be too surprised about a certain amount of disagreement.<p>I would very much appreciate if we could continue this discussion a bit once I had time for a full reply - and I agree, we have to back up quite a bit, the discussion got fragmented pretty quickly - but I won&#x27;t blame you if you declare me a lost case.