The War Over Reality

[vivian maxine]

Quantum Physics may be well understood (by scientists) but none agree on what it means or what it says about reality.

For those who are interested (and understand quantum physics) that is the gist of an article in the May 2017 issue of Discover magazine.

[mitchellmckain]

Quantum Physics may be well understood (by scientists) but none agree on what it means or what it says about reality.

For those who are interested (and understand quantum physics) that is the gist of an article in the May 2017 issue of Discover magazine.

On the contrary, the vast majority do agree on what it means for science. However, it is only natural that there should be a diversity of thought when it comes to implications for religious and philosophical questions such as the nature of reality. It is not too surprising that a publication, such as Discovery which renders science into a form for popular interest, would fail to make such a distinction.

[vivian maxine]

Mitchel, only because the two are so different, I point out that Discovery and Discover magazines are two different "animals". Discover is better. I grant that even it does not measure up to official science magazines (Scientific American, Nature) but it is basically good information. Not meaning to criticize your choice of names; just keeping the record straight. As a matter of fact, is Discovery still in print? I have not seen it for quite a while.

Somewhere among the literature that I brought home yesterday, there is an article about "real" and "reality". I can hardly wait .....

[mitchellmckain]

It was just a typo. I don't know any Discovery magazine. I only subscribe to Scientific American.

[vivian maxine]

It was just a typo. I don't know any Discovery magazine. I only subscribe to Scientific American.

All right. I make lots of typos. Just didn't want anyone thinking Discovery was publisher of our topic here. I so well remember this because, when I first went to subscribe to Discover, I accidentally did Discovery instead. An entire year of that. :-( It isn't a bad magazine; just has a totally different agenda than has science.

Now, what were we talking about? :-)

[mitchellmckain]

Well I was disputing the idea that when it comes to real science that scientist don't agree on what quantum physics actually means. This is not some obscure sideline issue in science but has been one of the central theoretical tools for scientific inquiry and calculations for quite some time with vast results for technology as well.

[vivian maxine]

Well I was disputing the idea that when it comes to real science that scientist don't agree on what quantum physics actually means. This is not some obscure sideline issue in science but has been one of the central theoretical tools for scientific inquiry and calculations for quite some time with vast results for technology as well.

There area so many mysteries in it that I await some great discovery that settles a few things. Like the universe as math. As I told Dave, it isn't that I believe or do not believe. It is just that what he and others describe so often sound impossible. I look forward to the day it is as understandable as are geology, biology and (careful now) the brain which fascinates me. Not that those are perfect but easier to grasp as of now.