(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: Sure I can.
What are you calling reality?
State of things as they exist.
(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: Can you explain the unreasonable behavior observed in the quantum world?
Why would they be unreasonable. Just because we don't understand the reason yet does not mean they are unreasonable.
(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: Here's what the Nobel Prize-winning physicist on Quantum Mechanics has to say about it.
"Do not keep saying to yourself, if you can possibly avoid it, 'How can it be like that?' because you will go 'down the drain', into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped." - Richard Feynman
How is that relevant?
(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: It's totally unreasonable, and no one has been able to give a reasonable explanation for it yet.
You contradict yourself. If it is unreasonable, then there wouldn't be a reasonable explanation.
(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: As far as we know, the true nature of reality is totally beyond anything that we might consider to be "reasonable".
Thankfully, what is reasonable and what we consider to be reasonable may be two different things.
(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: So where do you get off demanding that reality must be "reasonable"?
Where is it written in the stars that the true nature of reality must be "reasonable" in terms of human comprehension?
That reality is reasonable is tautologically true. Reality cannot be anything other that rational. That humans have been able to grasp at a potion of that reason, happens to be true. Excuse me if I don't let go of the portion we have grasped in response to the knowledge of the portion we have not grasped yet.
(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: Do you have a proof of that?
If you do, I suggest that you present it to the scientific community ASAP, you will definitely be world-famous instantly.
They all know it already. The proof is in the meaning of the words.
(February 5, 2012 at 4:33 pm)Abracadabra Wrote: Evidently we just disagree on what we consider to be "plausible".
As far as I'm concerned you're putting demands and restrictions on the true nature of reality that simply haven't been established. That's just wishful thinking on your part.
First of all, "true nature of reality" is redundant. Truth is what corresponds to reality and therefore nature of reality is automatically true.
Secondly, demands or restriction upon reality cannot be established, they can only be identified. One such identification is that reality cannot be irrational. Therefore, anything beyond the restrictions of reason is automatically implausible.
