Probably true. That said, I’m not sure how many readers could approach QM as a “classical-looking theory” and notice the possibility that particles aren’t real. I’m also not sure there’s a way to approach QM—or, indeed, anything else—that doesn’t bias the reader in favor of some ontology.
Probably true.
That said, I’m not sure how many readers could approach QM as a “classical-looking theory” and notice the possibility that particles aren’t real.
I’m also not sure there’s a way to approach QM—or, indeed, anything else—that doesn’t bias the reader in favor of some ontology.