So I understand that Heisenberg Uncertainty states that we cannot know the position and velocity of an electron at the same time. Although I haven't go through its proof and assumptions, I have read on couple place that thats because if we are able to observe it, that means it have to reflect at least couple photons to us. That means by the time we saw it, it already have changed its direction and position. Is this the main reasoning? If so, my question is as follows, How can someone claim that something cannot be known, if he couldn't find a way to know it himself. I mean yeah, we cannot observe the electron by directly measuring the photons on it. But you know maybe someone in the future will just do it by another way. Maybe he will measure the magnetic field of a single electron or maybe he will calculate the deviation depending on the angle he receive the photon reflected on the electron or maybe something more complex and bright. I mean, how can we build an entire physics on an argument that assumes impossibility of measurement. Isn't that a bit odd that everyone is comfortable with it? I haven't found an electron yet with its exact speed and position but I don't know if someone will say "here it is" tomorrow. Just because something is incredibly hard or sensitive doesn't mean claiming of impossibility is logical. This ought to be science not engineering. Am I missing something or does entire physics world really thinks thats our limit.