>We cannot > ask Feynman, but I actually asked Deutsch. He does not only think QM > is our most basic physical reality (he thinks math and computer > science lie in quantum mechanics), but he even takes quite seriously > his theory of parallel universes! and he is not alone. Speaking by > myself, I would agree with you, but I think we would need to > relativize the concept of agreement. I don't think QM is just another > model of merely mathematical value to make finite predictions. I think > physical models say something about our physical reality. If you deny > QM as part of our physical reality then I guess you deny any other > physical model. I wonder then what is left to you. You perhaps would > embrace total skepticism, perhaps even solipsism. Current trends have > moved from there to a more relativized positions, where models are > considered so, models, but still with some value as part of our actual > physical reality (just as Newtonian physics is not just completely > wrong after General Relativity since it still describes a huge part of > our physical reality).
Well, I don't embrace solipsism, but that is really a philosophic and personal rather than scientific matter ... and, I'm not going talk here about "what is", which IMO is not a matter for science ... but merely about what science can tell us. And, science cannot tell us whether QM or some empirically-equivalent, wholly randomness-free theory is the right one... ben g ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=120640061-aded06 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
