Einstein also was deeply troubled by the concept of quantum entanglement. Recall his thoughts about "spooky action at a distance". If I recall correctly, the other physicists of the time thought he was behind the time and perhaps past his prime. My thoughts are that he had a far superior capability for the visualization of phenomena. When theories became impossible to relate to common sense he could not use this gift further.
If Mills is correct, then Einstein might well have been able to continue in his usual manner. Better instruments may one day reveal that quantum mechanics has much wrong in their approximations to reality. So far many strange behaviors described by the quantum theory appear to be explained. I await the coming of the next better theory, or it may just take additional adjustments to the main one. The only thing that we can count on is that change is coming one day just as it has in the last thousands of years. Once Newton's understanding of gravitation was the ultimate answer. Predicting the future is never an easy task, but predicting that a future change to our understanding of nature will come is relatively easy. I always recall the scientist that felt that the patent office should be closed due to the lack of anything new of value to be invented. His thinking was premature! Perhaps in a thousand years it will be time to shut down that shop, but I would not count on it. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Eric Walker <[email protected]> To: vortex-l <[email protected]> Sent: Wed, Jun 3, 2015 11:30 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:daily info and more about the Scientific Method On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 11:21 AM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote: Lasers and their kin did not come into play until much later than they were possible. A.N. Whitehead felt that the ancient Greeks might have had enough knowledge of physics and math to discover that steam could be used a source of locomotive power had they been tea drinkers and observed boiling tea kettles. (I can't find the original quote and am going off of someone's paraphrase.) The practical harnessing of steam power, of course, was a major contributor to the industrial revolution. Albert knew something was not right and he spent much of his life trying to find the real truth. I get the sense that Einstein's objections were not with the facts relating to quantum behavior, but with the Copenhagen interpretation specifically. Did his objections go beyond that (Interesting to note that Einstein discovered the photoelectric effect, in which light is observed to behave in a quantum manner.) Eric
