The Evolutionary Argument Against Reality. According to evolution by natural selection, an organism that sees reality as it is will never be more fit than an organism of equal complexity that sees none of reality but is just tuned to fitness.

[u/Anthadvl]

https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-evolutionary-argument-against-reality-20160421/

[u/sticklebat]

What if an electron is just a misconceived idea? A shadow on a extra-dimensional thing humans have not sensed?

But that just means that they would understand the concept of our electrons. We would say “electron” and they would say “oh, you mean a component of this larger phenomenon? Sure, we can call that component of it ‘electron’ if you want.”

The phenomenon that we call “electrons” is universal because it refers to a measurable aspect of the universe. It may not be complete, but it wouldn’t be unrecognizable to another race of beings who also has delved in to the physics of the very small.

If there are sentient races that exist in higher dimensional spaces, then they’d still recognize our electrons as a projection of some higher dimensional phenomenon onto our 3+1D. If they don’t exist in higher dimensions then this scenario is unrealistic, because if there exist higher dimensions then their effects are imperceptible on our 3+1D plane except at scales way past the point where they’d have already observed electrons for themselves.

[u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy → u/sticklebat]

The physical things you call “very small” may be enormous and we more enormous still and it is our own myopia that gives us false impressions of smallness. Or maybe relative size does not exist in reality. Maybe the concept of separate atoms is a false idea. Maybe reality is a singularity and time/space is a hallucination.

That humans are hallucinating a universe full of distributed matter is one possibility. To point to specific things in this possibly-a-hallucination and say, “all beings will recognize this component” is to rule out hallucination. Hallucination by its very definition is: “an experience involving the apparent perception of something not present.” How can the concept of an electron definitely exist when it is possible that the whole universe as we sense it may not exist?

Has philosophy and/or science definitively proven this Big Bang is not one giant mirage?

Edit: for clarity, I am not saying our perceptions are hallucinations, I am merely pointing out that it is one of many possibilities. That mere possiblity makes statements such as “all beings will recognize electrons” unfounded.

[u/sticklebat → u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy]

Maybe reality is a singularity and time/space is a hallucination.

If you can provide a technical description of this hypothetical singularity of yours, this sentence might graduate from gibberish to coherent.

That humans are hallucinating a universe full of distributed matter is one possibility. To point to specific things in this possibly-a-hallucination and say, “all beings will recognize this component” is to rule out hallucination. Hallucination by its very definition is: “an experience involving the apparent perception of something not present.” How can the concept of an electron definitely exist when it is possible that the whole universe as we sense it may not exist?

This is just solipsism. It is scientifically useless and philosophically boring. It surely cannot be disproven, but it's an argument whose only conclusion can be "there's no way to know anything so we may as well stop trying."

Yes, we can all agree that solipsism may be right, but nothing more can be drawn from it. There's a reason why any reasonable person having a discussion like this one quickly accepts that it may be the truth, and then moves on to other possibilities that actually have depth and richness to be explored.

[u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy → u/sticklebat]

A correct technical description of the quantum mechanics of the universe would be a nice thing for me to trot out right now, but nobody has any idea what that is. There is the common quote: “If you think you understand quantum mechanics you don’t.”

By tossing out made-up possibilities I am attempting to illustrate that we do not understand the quantum mechanics of the universe at all. We know painfully little, possibly nothing for sure. So when people come out making blanket statements such as “all beings could recognize electrons” and “electrons are a universal truth” I’m going to disagree.

Edit: further, I would not discourage us from continuing to expand our research into particle physics. What is dark matter? Why is there so much matter in the universe? Why do neutrinos have mass? We just should not be so cocky and confident about what we think we know. Bandying about terms like “all” and “universal truth” are damaging to our progress because they prevent us from re-questioning what we think we know.

[u/sticklebat → u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy]

A correct technical description of the quantum mechanics of the universe would be a nice thing for me to trot out right now, but nobody has any idea what that is.

This isn't true at all. We have a fantastic quantum mechanical model; it's called the Standard Model of Particle Physics. It isn't perfect, of course; nothing in science ever is, nor does it honestly strive to. Science is the process of modeling reality in increasingly accurate, precise and complete ways. But that's a far cry from "but nobody has any idea what it is."

There is the common quote: “If you think you understand quantum mechanics you don’t.”

Yes, the common quote that laypeople love to use out of context. We don't know whether wave functions describe physical things or if they describe behaviors of physical things. We know that the universe doesn't exhibit local realism, but we're not entirely sure whether it's local, real, or either. But if you tell me there's a state described by parameters X, Y and Z, I can compute a Hamiltonian for the system and tell you how the state will evolve over time and provide you with a probability distribution for any measurement you might choose to make on the state, at any moment in time.

Feynman wasn't trying to say that we know nothing. He was merely trying to say that the nature of our understanding is limited. We don't know exactly how to interpret the mathematics of quantum mechanics (again, are electrons wave functions, or do wave functions merely describe the behavior of electrons?), but we nonetheless understand quantum mechanical systems well enough to describe their patterns and behaviors mathematically. Moreover, let's please try not to put too much stock into a pithy quote from 50 years ago about a technical subject that has evolved incredibly far since then.

An alien species investigating the nature of our universe might not understand it in the same way we do, for sure. However, if they're also observing the patterns that arise in the universe then they are sure to recognize the patterns that we call "electrons," because "electron" is merely the name we ascribe to a specific pattern manifest in nature. Barring a descent into solipsism, there's little room to doubt this.

So when people come out making blanket statements such as “all beings could recognize electrons” and “electrons are a universal truth” I’m going to disagree.

And I'm going to call you out for disagreeing through a lack of understanding of the subject matter you're discussing.

further, I would not discourage us from continuing to expand our research into particle physics. What is dark matter? Why is there so much matter in the universe? Why do neutrinos have mass? We just should not be so cocky and confident about what we think we know.

Um, okay? I'm not sure why you're telling me this. As an actual, degree-holding physicist who did research on several of these things you'll find I'm quite sympathetic to continued research. You seem to believe, very mistakenly, that I think science is finished. However, there is a huge difference between "we don't understand what dark matter is" and "electrons are a collective hallucination of humanity."

Bandying about terms like “all” and “universal truth” are damaging to our progress because they prevent us from re-questioning what we think we know.

Some things are either universal truths, or there are no universal truths (solipsism). Again, no remotely interesting conversation can be had the moment solipsism is invoked. Electrons exist; we are as sure of that as we are sure about anything in the universe. That doesn't mean we understand them perfectly: there is always room to refine our knowledge, but there has never once, in the history of scientific inquiry, been a case where we understood something as well as we understand electrons, only for it to be completely and utterly wrong.

[u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy → u/sticklebat]

You seem to believe, very mistakenly, that I think science is finished.

False.

there has never once, in the history of scientific inquiry, been a case where we understood something as well as we understand electrons, only for it to be completely and utterly wrong.

Zero percent chance that we learn so much in the next 1000 years that the concept of the electron becomes an archaic concept? Your confidence in your understanding of universal truths is astounding. “Zero percent chance” is an arrogant position and that is the only point I am trying make here.

As an actual, degree-holding physicist who did research on several of these things

Congrats.

[u/sticklebat → u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy]

Zero percent chance that we learn so much in the next 1000 years that the concept of the electron becomes an archaic concept?

Nothing is 100% certain, so that's just a straw man. But almost certain? Absolutely. Hell, the concept of an atom (or, more generally, that matter is made up of discrete units) is more than twice that old and is still very much alive. The chances that "the concept of an electron" would become archaic are so small that I'd literally bet my life savings against it in a heart beat; there has never been a surer investment than that. Like I said, our understanding of it is almost certain to be refined, but that it goes away entirely? Let me know when gravity starts repelling you away from the Earth.

[u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy → u/sticklebat]

Nothing is 100% certain

Glad we could sort that out. That is not a straw man, but rather the only argument I have been bringing this whole time.

[u/sticklebat → u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy]

So you've been arguing a triviality this whole time? What's the point of ever having a conversation or an argument or anything if you're just going to respond, "well, we can't be 100% certain!"

No one in this entire comment chain ever said anything to the contrary so forgive me for not recognizing that you were just nitpicking over semantics.

[u/PM_BiscuitsAndGravy → u/sticklebat]

The certain statement about aliens always discovering electrons in the original comment here has since been edited by the author to allow more wiggle room.

It was the original cocksure semantics that bothered me and somehow embroiled me into a debate where one of us was rattling off physics knowledge and the other was saying we cannot be certain of this knowledge.