> No, I'm actually saying that everything is QM I assumed that's what you're saying. I'm familiar with the viewpoint that classical physics is a pragmatic appr

> No, I'm actually saying that everything is QM I assumed that's what you're saying. I'm familiar with the viewpoint that classical physics is a pragmatic approximation to QM for macro phenomena. > About the pilot wave theory, well it came after the standard formulation of QM, so people didn't choose between them Of course. I was posing a hypothetical to demonstrate an error the argument you were making (assuming the conclusion as part of your argument). > ignoring that you put by hand the actual QM wavefunction to make it work, then you fix things to get the old stuff back. I find all that weirder than standard QM. I may be missing something here, and I haven't looked into the calculational details of pilot wave theory, but my understanding is that the same probabilities you ordinarily deal with in QM exist, but they are used to signify lack of knowledge of the observer of the state of the system (rather than saying that the system is literally in an indefinite state), so it makes sense that the wavefunction machinery would still be present, but used in a different way.