After my response to Steve Luckstead's column (claiming people were being unkind to science) I have had numerous inquiries from people asking whether I doubted the mathematical precision that has been brought to bear upon quantum physics.
As my response was limited to 400 words, it was impossible to fully state my objection to his thesis. Allow me to finish my thoughts.
Any physical theory -- including standard quantum theory -- is comprised of two parts: A mathematical formulation and a physical interpretation of the mathematical formulas. While the mathematical core of quantum theory has been confirmed to a fantastic degree of precision, there are at least 10 different physical interpretations of the mathematics, and no one knows which -- if any -- is correct since they are all empirically equivalent.
Luckstead insinuated the incredible mathematical precision at the core of quantum physics means that it has been conquered. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The literature is replete with contradictions.
An evolutionary physicist at a major American university stated: "An unexpected result of our study of quantum physics has been the necessity of referring people to the philosophy department when they need someone to debate a creationist."
Others claim quantum physics proves that a necessary "first cause" has been disproven since they have no idea how or why things behave as they do in a quantum vacuum. Obviously, that is the argument from ignorance.
Until science can answer how and why its mathematical predictions are so incredibly accurate, quantum physics will remain the enigma that it is today.
Guillermo F. Garcia