3 ms·

I know you will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're just stating that the world operates on quantum fields. I'm not questioning that. It is just that th

I know you will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think you're just stating that the world operates on quantum fields. I'm not questioning that. It is just that the fact that our universe harbors intelligent life, and perhaps organization in general, seems to be dependent on the fact that quantum fields behave "particle-like" in interactions. The fact that the bottom seems to be quantum fields instead of either particles or waves doesn't in any way exclude the possibility that this was a deliberate design choice to compute random outcomes from continuous possibilities at interactions.

krastanov 5y ago
Yes, you are right. However, this "design choice" makes things less efficient and more cumbersome to compute, not the other way around. There are easy ways to get random numbers from continuous dynamics that do not involve something as painful as quantum fields. There are also some consistency arguments (contradictions arising in classical theories that do not exist in quantum theories, so maybe it was not even a "choice", but the only way to make a self-consistent simulation). And there is the whole interpreation-of-quantum-mechanics issue: it is a separate can of worms to even claim that measurements of quantum observables produce random outcomes (but that question is too philosophical for me).