Getting rid of nonlocality from quantum physics

[Lord Jestocost]

@PeroK

I merely want to point out that everyone has a story which is influenced by personal ideological beliefs. That's why I - as a working physicist - adopt an instrumentalist's point of view.
My personal story could be, for example: The mind is fundamental and the objects only exist as illusions in my mind. Neither your story nor my story can be proved or disproved by means of the scientific method.

 

[PeroK]

@PeroK

I merely want to point out that everyone has a story which is influenced by personal ideological beliefs. That's why I - as a working physicist - adopt an instrumentalist's point of view.
My personal story could be, for example: The mind is fundamental and the objects only exist as illusions in my mind. Neither your story nor my story can be proved or disproved by means of the scientific method.

This is why I rarely reply to posts in this sub-forum.

Whenever anyone is confronted with a hard question, they can retreat into an argument barely discernible from Zen Buddhism!

It seems to me a huge unnecessary burden on orthodox QM to explain how specific things (things with specific properties) come into existence, as opposed to other things with other properties. The simplest explanation is that something with the specific properties exists and measurements are compatible with that thing and those properties.

Explaining how properties can be not well-defined until measurement is bad enough. But, that the thing itself comes in and out of existence is asking too much, for no theoretical benefit that I can see.

 

[RUTA]

@PeroK

I merely want to point out that everyone has a story which is influenced by personal ideological beliefs. That's why I - as a working physicist - adopt an instrumentalist's point of view.
My personal story could be, for example: The mind is fundamental and the objects only exist as illusions in my mind. Neither your story nor my story can be proved or disproved by means of the scientific method.

Read Becker’s book https://www.google.com/books/edition/What_Is_Real/X4QqDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover He makes a good case for the relevance of going beyond instrumentalism.

 

[PeterDonis]

The OP appears to be gone and the discussion seems to have covered every possible viewpoint. Thread closed.