Thanks for the explanation. I was still confused about how "things actually are material and unchanging" led to "reality does not exist when we are not observin

Thanks for the explanation. I was still confused about how "things actually are material and unchanging" led to "reality does not exist when we are not observing it." You pointed me in the right direction though and I'm convinced that the term is being abused by the caller: >Realism in the sense used by physicists does not equate to realism in metaphysics. The latter is the claim that the world is in some sense mind-independent http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_realism#Local_realism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_realism#Local_realism http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0607057v2.pdf http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0607057v2.pdf If papers are being written about how "local realism" should be banned from scientific discussion, I'm fairly certain it isn't appropriate for laymen to bandy about the term and then make wild ass philosophical assertions based on it.