What is Real?
Adam was a guest on a Veritasium’s video about quantum physics; this seems like a solid, widely reviewed book on its history.
It becomes very technical and theoretical, which is a pity, because the subject is fascinating. I am probably not the right audience. I followed the early sections and actually loved how it explained important phenomena like entanglement, Bell’s theorem, and the various interpretations, but then I got lost in the discussions about what is real and what is not, too advanced and abstract. I know what I don’t know; this is my limit in physics. It remains an impressive work on the topic and I appreciate the first part.
Notes
- Schrodinger: as soon as you measure something, wave functions collapse. The concept of what counts as a measurement is the puzzle at the heart of quantum physics.
- Bell showed that either nature is nonlocal, or quantum physics is entirely wrong (see the roulette experiment that outputs numbers), or we live in the multiverse interpretation.
- The skeptics’ point of view is interesting: if I cannot measure it, why should I care? But in chemistry, where we track electron behavior behind reactions, is it not fundamental? How do you explain everything that happens? Instrumentalism is not the solution, in my view.
- Science combines experiments, logic, and mathematics to build explanations, continually trying to reduce its own biases and relying only on empirical evidence, not authority.
- I’ll give the last word on the subject to someone far more qualified
So many people today - and even professional scientists - seem to me like somebody who has seen thousands of trees but has never seen a forest. A knowledge of the historic and philosophical background gives that kind of independence from prejudices of his generation from which most scientists are suffering. This independence created by philosophical insight is - in my opinion - the mark of distinction between a mere artisan or specialist and a real seeker after truth.
- Albert Einstein