So given how for example we can’t know an electron’s position and velocity at the same time and other small scale observations and measurements involve uncertainty and randomness. Is there any solid proof that we’re not just wrong? I know all science is inherently possibly wrong and is a model of best fit but this part of science in particular seems so arbitrary to actually be a good model.
In: 1
Your question is basically is about the buzz around the universe not being locally real from some time ago, as well as other propositions like the uncertainty principle. The uncertainty principle isn’t about measurement or even any specific physical thing, but about the mathematics of waves. Since reality is constructed of waves (e.g., photons, electrons, protons show wave-particle duality), it applies to them.
The opposing side usually appeals to the same arguments made many moons ago ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr%E2%80%93Einstein_debates](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr%E2%80%93Einstein_debates)), but the accumulated experimental evidence is that they’re wrong.
Could we still be wrong? Sure, I guess. At the very least, our understanding is still incomplete. But we’re about as right as we can be about it. Also you may want to adjust your expectations of what is arbitrary for physical reality haha. Do you feel a deep easy to understand reason for why the rest mass of an electron is 9.1093837015 × 10−31 kg? Couldn’t there have been a universe where it is slightly different? Sure, I guess. But it isn’t.
Latest Answers