McIntosh is a town in Marion County, United States. As of the 2000 census, the town population was 453; as of 2004, the population recorded by the U. S. Census Bureau was 486, it is part of the Ocala Metropolitan Statistical Area. McIntosh was platted in 1885, named in honor of Col. John C. McIntosh, an early settler. A post office has been in operation at McIntosh since 1887. McIntosh is located at 29°26′58″N 82°13′14″W. According to the United States Census Bureau, the town has a total area of 0.7 square miles, all land. As of the census of 2000, there were 453 people, 227 households, 133 families residing in the town; the population density was 650.8 inhabitants per square mile. There were 271 housing units at an average density of 389.4 per square mile. The racial makeup of the town was 96.91% White, 2.43% African American, 0.22% Native American, 0.44% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 1.55% of the population. There were 227 households out of which 11.9% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 52.9% were married couples living together, 5.3% had a female householder with no husband present, 41.4% were non-families.

34.8% of all households were made up of individuals and 16.3% had someone living alone, 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.00 and the average family size was 2.53. In the town, the population was spread out with 13.2% under the age of 18, 3.5% from 18 to 24, 19.2% from 25 to 44, 38.4% from 45 to 64, 25.6% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 53 years. For every 100 females, there were 81.2 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 81.1 males. The median income for a household in the town was $36,250, the median income for a family was $58,500. Males had a median income of $33,750 versus $20,500 for females; the per capita income for the town was $20,617. About 2.7% of families and 6.3% of the population were below the poverty line, including none of those under age 18 and 14.5% of those age 65 or over. Ocala/Marion Visitors' & Convention Bureau McIntosh news and forum

There is a diversity of views that propose interpretations of quantum mechanics. They vary in how many physicists reject them. An interpretation of quantum mechanics is a conceptual scheme that proposes to relate the mathematical formalism to the physical phenomena of interest; the present article is about those interpretations which, independently of their intrinsic value, remain today less known, or are less debated by the scientific community, for different reasons. The historical dichotomy between the "orthodox" Copenhagen interpretation and "unorthodox" minority views developed in the 1950s debate surrounding Bohmian mechanics. During most of the 20th century, collapse theories were the mainstream view, the question of interpretation of quantum mechanics revolved around how to interpret "collapse". Proponents of either "pilot-wave" or "many-worlds" interpretations tend to emphasize how their respective camps were intellectually marginalized throughout 1950s to 1980s. In this sense, all non-collapse theories are "minority" interpretations.

The term'Copenhagen interpretation' suggests some definite set of rules for interpreting the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics. However, no such text exists, apart from some informal popular lectures by Bohr and Heisenberg, which contradict each other on several important issues, it appears that the term "Copenhagen interpretation", with its more definite sense, was coined by Heisenberg in the 1950s, while criticizing "unorthodox" interpretations such as that of David Bohm. Before the book was released for sale, Heisenberg expressed regret for having used the term, due to its suggestion of the existence of other interpretations, that he considered to be "nonsense". Since the 1990s, there has been a resurgence of interest in non-collapse theories. Interpretations of quantum mechanics now fall into the categories of collapse theories, hidden variables, many-worlds and quantum information approaches. While collapse theories continue to be seen as the default or mainstream position, there is no longer any clear dichotomy between "orthodox" and "unorthodox" views.

The Stanford Encyclopedia as of 2015 groups interpretations of quantum mechanics into five classes: "Bohmian mechanics", "collapse theories", "many-worlds interpretations", "modal interpretations" and "relational interpretations". Some of the relevant approaches to quantum mechanics have now themselves become "minority interpretations", or seen as obsolete. In this sense, there is a variety of reasons for why a specific approach may be considered marginal: because it is a specialized sub-variant of a more known class of interpretations, because it is seen as obsolete, because it is a recent suggestion that has not received wide attention, or because it is rejected as flawed; as a rough guide to a picture of what are the relevant "minority" views, consider the "snapshot" of opinions collected in a poll by Schlosshauer et al. at the 2011 "Quantum Physics and the Nature of Reality" conference of July 2011. The authors reference a informal poll carried out by Max Tegmark at the "Fundamental Problems in Quantum Theory" conference in August 1997.

In both polls, the Copenhagen interpretation received the largest number of votes. In Tegmark's poll, many-worlds interpretations came in second place, while in the 2011 poll, many-worlds was at third place, behind quantum information approaches in second place. Other options given as "interpretation of quantum mechanics" in the 2011 poll were: objective collapse theories, Quantum Bayesianism and Relational quantum mechanics, besides consistent histories, de Broglie–Bohm theory, modal interpretation, ensemble interpretation and transactional interpretation which received no votes. "Everettian" interpretations as a whole were long a "minority" field in general, but they have grown in popularity. Multiple variants and offshoots of Everett's original proposal exist, which have sometimes developed the basic ideas in contradictory ways. Interpretations of an Everettian type include the following. Many-minds interpretation Cosmological interpretation "Self-locating uncertainty" interpretation QBism and other variants of Quantum Bayesianism Relational quantum mechanics treats the state of a quantum system as being observer-dependent, that is, the state is the relation between the observer and the system.

While a relational conception of quantum states dates back at least to Grete Hermann in 1935, in modern usage "relational quantum mechanics" refers to an interpretation delineated by Carlo Rovelli in 1996. It uses some ideas from Wheeler about quantum information. "Bohm-like" theories as a whole are a "minority view" as compared to Copenhagen-type or many-worlds interpretations. Popper's propensity-based interpretation Stochastic interpretation, the most well-known variant of, due to Edward Nelson, further elaborated upon by a conjecture of Francesco Calogero Time-symmetric interpretations Transactional interpretation Zitterbewegung interpretation von Neumann–Wigner interpretation of historical interest Objective-collapse theories: these are extensions of quantum mechanics rather than "interpretations" in the narrow sense. Penrose interpretation Ghirardi-Rimini-Weber theory The ensemble interpretation, or statistical interpretation can be viewed as a minimalist approach.