From: sylvia@email.invalid   
      
   On 20-June-22 12:50 am, Richard Livingston wrote:   
   > On Thursday, June 16, 2022 at 2:27:54 AM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:   
   > ...   
   >> Part of the problem is that the thinking can not go much beyond pure   
   >> speculation until and unless we get experimental results that are either   
   >> inconsistent with QM, or are consistent with it, but not fully described   
   >> by it, in the latter case indicating that QM is incomplete.   
   >>   
   >> Sylvia.   
   >   
   > Agreed, but part of the problem has been that there has been little thinking   
   > (except by a very few) about what quantum mechanics implies about our   
   > concepts of time and causality, nor how the Born Rule works.  There are   
   > two ways to discover deeper theories about such things.  One is by an   
   > experiment that gives an unexpected result (e.g. the Lamb shift) that   
   > inspires a theory.  The other is a speculation that permits an experimental   
   > test.  (And then there are the speculations that are inherently untestable,   
   > e.g. the so called many worlds interpretation of QM.)   
   >   
   > I suspect out current impasse in physics is due to an unexamined assumption   
   > in our theory.  While it would be nice for an experiment to lead us in that   
   > direction, until then we can speculate and try to test those ideas.  But   
   first   
   > we have to admit that there is something that needs a deeper understanding.   
   >   
   > Rich L.   
      
   Still, we don't actually know that there is anything underneath quantum   
   mechanics (QM) that exists. Unless there are infinite layers of   
   mechanism, there must be a point at which it just does what it does,   
   with no more explanation being possible.   
      
   Perhaps QM has reached the bottom level, and that's just how the   
   universe is.   
      
   Sylvia.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)