The discussion revolves around the concept of realism in quantum mechanics and its opposite, exploring terminology and philosophical implications. Participants examine whether "anti-realism" or "non-realism" is appropriate in this context, and they delve into the implications of various interpretations and theories related to realism.
Participants express a range of views on the terminology and implications of realism and its opposites, indicating that there is no consensus on the definitions or the philosophical interpretations of these concepts.
Some discussions point to the vagueness of terms like "local anti-realism" and "local non-realism," and the limitations in the literature regarding theories that relax criteria for realism. The conversation also touches on the dependence of definitions and the unresolved nature of certain philosophical questions in the context of quantum mechanics.
wuliheron said:I'm sorry to say I don't know of any interesting up to date works on the subject. Contextualist theories are just beginning to establish themselves and the evidence is still pouring in at a brisk pace. Photosynthesis and animal navigation abilities that apparently can only be explained by room temperature entanglement for example. Physicists are rediscovering the world all over again and often feeling a bit humbled by it being oh so much more complex then they imagined as well as excited at the prospects. Not unlike the transition we went through from Newtonian mechanics to modern physics.
fuzzyfelt said:Ok, thanks, wuliheron. I've seen and think I've mentioned this sort of notion in other contexts ((:), but hadn't seen much applied in this one, too.