Lots of people whose skulls are confined inwards a spherical bubble are imagining that they're creative geniuses who are thinking exterior the box. But the reality is within out. One needs to perform the spherical inversion to meet it. They're narrow-minded, intellectually limited losers confined into a bubble piece the proper solutions require the realm exterior the bubble.
It's mostly some other moronic, anti-quantum article. The claim that quantum mechanics contradicts our intuition is repeated thrice (so that readers with the IQ below seventy don't immature lady it). Again, similar inwards almost all other moronic articles of this kind, we're told that physicists accept invented dozens of "interpretations" in addition to are obliged to await for a theory that is non quantum:
...So physicists scramble to translate quantum theory inwards a way that makes room for a mind-independent reality. H5N1 pop way to exercise this entails postulating imagined, empirically unverifiable, theoretical entities defined equally observer-independent...It may last "popular" to supervene upon quantum mechanics (whose application depends on the choice of an observer) with a theory whose entities are "observer-independent". It is indeed popular, particularly alongside idiots in addition to senile men. But it is not physically possible in addition to no genuine physicists are working on such things. Only "philosophers", crackpots, in addition to decidedly erstwhile physicists are affiliated with this totally misguided movement.
Quantum mechanics (with its demand to pick an observer to apply it) is unavoidable. There is no feasible competing theory, whether or non this basic fact is know to those who remember it should last "popular" to believe that classical physics keeps on ruling.
Kastrup repeats some empty words from Carlo Rovelli most "relational quantum mechanics". It says that everything that nosotros tin say inwards quantum mechanics are statements most the "relationships" betwixt the chosen observer in addition to the remainder of the world. Now, this is a sequence of words which has some unavoidable ambiguity. You may elbow grease to clarify what Rovelli exactly wants to say. His poetic books can't build this call for whatsoever to a greater extent than precise.
When you lot analyze it rationally, he either repeats precisely the same thing that was amazingly discovered past times Heisenberg, Bohr, in addition to pals inwards the early on 20th century; or he is adding to the nonsensical propositions past times other chronic "interpreters". It doesn't affair much which of these groups an Italian-French writer of cheesy quasi-scientific pop books belongs to. What's to a greater extent than of import significant is that in that location currently exists no feasible alternative, no novel sentiment that would deserve an intelligent physicist's fourth dimension equally a replacement or refinement of the universal postulates of quantum mechanics that were written downward to a greater extent than than ninety years ago.
Rovelli in addition to lots of others are inventing novel "brands" that are supposed to last valuable equally novel foundations of quantum mechanics. But "relational quantum mechanics", "QBism", "participatory realism" etc. are just words in addition to the added value of the "beef" of these 1,400 interpretations is precisely equally worthless equally the beef of the 1,400 cryptocurrencies. Well, a departure is that the master copy foundations of quantum mechanics, equally discovered past times the Copenhagen school, are a precious foundation of modern scientific discipline piece the master copy Bitcoin is equally worthless equally its 1,399 clones.
The Scientific American article to a greater extent than oftentimes than non conveys the right spirit that "something that looks similar solipsism in addition to dependence on the minds" is considered inwards quantum mechanics in addition to likely has to last considered – piece the devil is inwards the details surrounding the role of the "minds" inwards quantum mechanics. People err on both sides. Some people remember that quantum mechanics is a justification for all kinds of religious, superstitions, spiritual, in addition to parapsychological beliefs. Others remember that quantum mechanics isn't allowed to modify anything most the classical foundations of science.
Both groups are wrong, of course. Quantum mechanics did modify in addition to has to modify key philosophical assumptions underlying the laws of physics (and indeed, it redefined physics from a naive model of objective reality to a method to calculate probabilities that statements most observables past times pre-chosen observers are correct); but this replacement of the engine of classical physics past times the novel engine of quantum mechanics hasn't enabled whatsoever of the usual supernatural miracles that were considered earlier the historic current of quantum mechanics.
Kastrup's article mentions some words, e.g. pro-perceptions quote past times Andrei Linde, that are going inwards the right direction but they were non supposed to last a "revolutionary (or new) interpretation of quantum mechanics". But equally a whole, Kastrup's article didn't – in addition to couldn't – enjoin you lot anything novel most foundations of quantum mechanics because aught novel exists.
Finally, I desire to pass a few words with the championship of the SciAm text, equally promised inwards my title.
Kastrup tells you lot that physicists are "confined inwards a (quantum) box" piece the interpreters are "brave creative souls that are thinking exterior this box". You tin meet the unwarranted self-confidence inwards this statement. The right tilt is precisely the opposite, of course. Quantum mechanics is the ultimate illustration of the thinking exterior the box – in addition to everyone who is dissatisfied with it in addition to tries to regain observer-independent "interpretations" is a mentally mediocre would-be thinker who is confined to the classical box in addition to who just isn't skillful plenty intellectually to last able to larn exterior the box.
This tilt of mine is unquestionably accurate, according to the really definitions of thinking exterior the box. Thinking exterior the box agency to last able to larn rid of hidden assumptions that don't truly accept to last truthful in addition to that weren't formulated or proven equally a role of the work (e.g. the work to regain the key laws of physics).
Why is it called "thinking exterior the box"?
Because this whole phrase generalizes a particular problem. Draw three past times three dots inwards a grid. Now the business is to push clit iv directly lines which are connected to each other (the endpoint of N-th describe is the starting call for of the (N+1)st one) in addition to thus that you lot intersect all these ix dots. Now, if the describe segments remain within the three past times three square, you lot may convince yourself that there's no solution. But you lot may realize that there's no argue why the describe segments should remain within the three past times three box. They may last longer. And ane time they're allowed to last longer, you lot may regain the solution pictured above.
(There are other "creative" solutions, e.g. ones using thick lines, ones compactifying the newspaper on a cylinder to build some coordinates periodic, in addition to others.)
Again, let's await what has truly happened. The typical people who solve the "4 lines through three past times three dots" work are confined past times the supposition that the describe segments accept to last short, within the three past times three foursquare at ane time surrounding the ix dots, but no such status has truly been phrased. And that's why they accept to fail. People who remember exterior the box are capable of looking for the solution inwards a broader laid upward of candidate solutions – primarily because they accept the inventiveness or fantasy to envision a broader laid upward of candidate solutions inwards the offset place. And that's why they regain a solution, using the longer describe segments.
It's precisely analogous with quantum mechanics. People were trying to explicate atoms etc. using the basic framework of classical physics – where an observer-independent "model" precisely matching the conjectured "objective reality" exists in addition to has properties that are the same according to all honest observers. But no such status has always been told us past times Nature – because there's no scientific evidence inwards favor of this supposition – in addition to that's why nosotros aren't allowed to build this assumption.
Werner Heisenberg was the creative genius who was the offset ane to last able to realize that this unjustified supposition – supposition of observer-independent reality i.e. classical physics – was beingness made. He was able to await for solutions – improve candidate laws of physics – within a greater realm of ideas. Statements most objects were all of a abrupt constitute to last observer-dependent in addition to observables were linked to linear operators on a complex Hilbert space. And within this broader laid upward of ideas, ane tin regain the laws of physics that solve the work – laws of physics that are logically consistent in addition to compatible with the empirical evidence, too.
But if ane stays within the box, in that location is just no solution, just similar inwards the instance of the three past times three grid with iv lines.
Werner Heisenberg was capable of discovering the new, larger realm of ideas in addition to possible theories of physics, ane that invalidates the previous, automatically, silently, in addition to mindlessly embraced supposition \(\hbar=0\) – where \(\hbar\) is the reduced Planck's constant that measures how much the laws of physics deviate from the assumptions of classical physics. And within his broader laid upward of potential theories, he could chop-chop regain the right theory of the atom etc. The framework of quantum mechanics plant for our "theory of nearly everything" (TONE, the Standard Model) equally good equally our unique candidate for a TOE, string/M-theory.
Like Columbus, he had to regain the realm that no ane else earlier him had whatsoever clue about. Now, to a greater extent than than ninety later, everything that his regain has led to is available but lots of people are unable to fifty-fifty understand that to depict the phenomena inwards the world, particularly the microscopic world, ane needs to remember exterior the \(\hbar=0\) box. In the existent world, the dependence of the applied laws of physics on the observers, the quantity \(\hbar\), is just non null in addition to cannot last zero.
And these people who are unable to fifty-fifty understand what Heisenberg had to discover accept the chutzpah to claim that it's them who are thinking "outside the box". They are not. When compared to Christopher Columbus, they are the people who aren't fifty-fifty capable of taking the flying over the Atlantic Ocean. They are just intellectually worthless laymen in addition to losers. Just imagine how stupid you lot accept to last to last unable to fifty-fifty sit on your aß inwards that damn Boeing (perhaps similar this insufferable man child betwixt Berlin in addition to New York) – in addition to that's precisely analogous to the stupidity of the "interpreters". The arrogance with which they introduce themselves equally skillful thinkers is totally indefensible.
And that's the memo.