If quantum physics is incomprehensible how does it work?

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
What about the experimental results that we get from quantum physics, quantum mechanics? We see that they work around us. This is a very important question.
How do they work if they don’t make sense? Science has a functional aspect and an ontological aspect. Ontology refers to the nature of reality, what things actually are, and functional aspect refers to how things work. So now, we normally think that the two are related, but how they are related is quite complex.
So as I was saying myself, these equations work fantastically. So that quantum physics, not just quantum mechanics, quantum physics, there are so many other fields of quantum chakra now, but they all work. Contributed by their work, when we need devices using the equations that quantum physics has given us, those devices work very well.
They experiment with themselves. This is all the functional aspect. But ontological aspect means, what is it actually? That means, if we take the theory of quantum physics and try to conceive what it means about the nature of reality.
So if ultimately everything is just wave forms, then from there, how do the objects come about? And of course, now there are the collapse of quantum equation, there are multiple interpretations, there are parallel universe interpretation, standard interpretation, open-eyed interpretation. I won’t go into the technicalities of that right now. But the simple point is that from the ontological, ontological is the nature of reality, how do you use those equations to explain how things work, explain how things are, not how things work.
So they are two different things. This is called in philosophy, the difference between nomena and phenomena. Phenomena is how things appear to us.
Nomena is how things actually are. So for example, you know, I see this as a spectacle. Now this is a spectacle.
But if I see the same thing under a microscope, I’ll see it differently. If I see it with an X-ray sensor, I’ll see it differently. So I talk about that when we talk about cosmology and so on.
But then the point is that quantum physics, ontological implications, are something which are incomprehensible. And that is why quantum physics in and of itself is a mystery to our mainstream physics. So how to reconcile the factual working of quantum physics with the factual nature of the world as we understand it, with our experience and our intelligence.
How are we to compare? So for example, if I have a map, and by that map I go to the territory. But then I look at the map, and I look at the territory. There’s no similarity.
But still I follow the map and I reach the destination. How is that possible? You know, the map shows me there’s a river over here. The map shows me that there’s a road over here.
If I look, there’s a river. But if I follow the map, I get across somehow. So is there a road there or is there a river there? What is the direction? So scientists stop thinking and start calculating.
So don’t bother, just let the calculations work. So that’s why many scientists use a functional approach to quantum physics. And they have just put aside the ontological aspects of it.
Although some scientists are trying to work out the ontological implications, but it’s just too complex of a story.