We have 1 particle. Classical Mechanics says: If I know the initial state I can predict with absolute certainty what position (etc.) it will have the next second. Quantum Mechanics says: I don't know the position the particle will hit. But If I know the state I can tell you the possible future positions and their probabilities. Seems that QM has much less predicting power. But... We have 100, 1000, 10000 particles, all in the same state. CM says: well... if they're all really identical and all really in the same state (seems strange to think of it...), all particles will hit the very same spot after a second's interval. And I know were this spot is. QM says: if I know the identical states of all the identical particles I can tell you with higher and higher precision (as far as there are more particles adding on) the distribution we'll see. Since the particles are all identical, it's not really important to tell which one went where. The distribution is what counts. So I'd proudly say that I now have the same degree of information as you (classical observer) have. (And all experiments with microscopic particles support the QM "distribution" view) This simple picture suggest how the QM approach gets just the same level of information as CM with large ensembles of particles. It also suggest that physic reality is not to be looked after in the single particles, that have little meaning as far as prediction power is concerned, but rather in the whole of them, bringing naturally on the idea of something holistic or the concept of a field..... What do you think? It was just a stray musing, since I'm finally catching on with QM priciples and looking forward to confront with QTF.