So, yes, it is in fact very illogical, which means it is also irrational. And doubly irrational for trying to be illogical and to pretend reality is not what it is.
Whether or not something is intuitive is rather irrelevant when it comes to science. Conclusions based on anything other than logic and reason do not matter. Your initial emotional reactions do not really matter. What matters is what you can show to be true using reason.
3) “Why should human logic and rationality apply to quantum mechanics?”
Because logic and rationality apply to everything. Logic is the process of applying elementary methods of thinking in order to identify things as they are. Principles such as the Law of Non-Contradiction. Laws which apply to thinking about everything, be it the tiniest quantum particle or the most massive galaxy.
The laws of logic are not simply conventions of thought. They are not simply rules we impose upon reality because it suits us. They identify requirements which all thought must adhere to in order to understand reality as it is. The laws of logic describe principles of thought which must be adhered to if we wish to reason about anything at all and be sure that our reasoning is valid.
They identify basic facts of reality which apply to everything that exists. To exist at all is to be subject to the laws of logic. There is no reason why the subject matter of quantum mechanics is outside the realm of logic.
Rationality is the recognition of the laws of logic and an adherence to thinking in terms of these laws. And is required in order to properly understand reality.
So, a better question would be: why shouldn’t we expect quantum mechanics to be subject to the laws of logic and rationality?
4) “It’s man’s comprehension of such phenomenon that is illogical and irrational.”
I take it to mean that what we think about such phenomenon is illogical and irrational and is therefore wrong.
This is most certainly the case. A great deal of what we think we know about the quantum world is illogical and therefore wrong. But, not simply wrong. Grossly irrational and entirely without any rational basis.
But what if this is meant to imply that we are just thinking about it wrong? That it *is* the way they say it is and we just must accept it and that it would be illogical and irrational to deny it.
Well, this is wrong. We should not reject the way we know reality to work. We should not reject logic and reason, the only means we must understand the world. Not if we want to learn about the world, understand how it works and deal with reality as it really is.
If someone does so and makes irrational claims, we must not simply accept that is the way it is and that we are wrong about how reality works. We know better than to do this. With a rational philosophy, we can understand the nature of objective reality and our responsibility to deal with reality as it is, not as we declare it to be or how we want it to be.
Now, let us get back to what Mr Gaede is talking about, shall we?
At about 4.30 (4 minutes 30 seconds into the video), he says this:
“People have this notion out there that, you know, science is not supposed to be rational.”
That is certainly true, many people do not expect science to be rational. Not fully and certainly not consistently.
This is not limited to laymen. Many scientists, particularly those in the field of physics, do not expect science to be rational!
“So, if you’re wondering why we have big bang, black hole, and some of these fantastic theories out there it is because a lot of these people have been conditioned, since they were children, to believe in these kinds of stories.”
Is the Big Bang theory a fantastic theory? Oh certainly, in many ways it is. We cover some of that in episode three of the podcast
[Editorial: The episode says episode two, but this was a mistake, it is in fact episode three as it says here in the transcript]
What about all this stuff about black holes? What is wrong with the theory of black holes? Haven’t we seen black holes?
Well, there are a number of issues with this. First, black holes are supposed to contain a singularity.
What is that? A mathematical point with infinite density, or so they allege.
A mathematical point? An abstraction? Is that what powers black holes? Well, no. If black holes are real, they certainly do not have mathematical abstractions in them. Saying that explains nothing about the real world. So, since the concept of singularity is essential to that of the idea of a “black hole”, the entire concept is invalid.
“[M]ath-magicians, as I call them, they have not figured out how this universe works.”
What does Bill Gaede mean by math-magicians? Well, later we shall see that this is an apt description of what many mathematical physicists are trying to get away with. Let me explain.