- 93

- 4

I have heard that QM is the most accurate and scientifically tested theory to date.

I have also read in many of these threads that it is silent when it comes to unobserved/unmeasured quantum systems?

Is this not a contradiction in terms?

I can say with almost 100% probability that the hubble comet will return every 86 years , from classical Newtonian laws without looking at the comet.

I accept that I will only know that it has arrived when I look for it at a certain position and time.

But at least I can predict that it will be there with 100% certainty.

QM seems to accept that , it is impossible to predict with certainty( or at least with very high probability)

where and when to measure microscopic quantum objects such as electrons and photons.

So we use probability and interpretations which give us the next best guestimate?

Surely our universe is well defined and not best described on probabilistic and accidental events as

some physicists are led to believe.

I would like to know the current views on the subject and has there been any progress in this line of thought.

Johan