It’s complete nonsense.
"
That’s what Nobel Prize-winning physicist Gerard ’t Hooft said in a recent interview when he
was asked if quantum theory is a good theory. His statement surprised the physics community
because ’t Hooft is a well-respected figure in particle physics and quantum field theory. He
developed the mathematical ideas behind non-Abelian gauge theory, which is a key part of
the Standard Model of particle physics.
’t Hooft said he is not satisfied with the common interpretation of quantum mechanics,
especially the Copenhagen interpretation. He believes that quantum mechanics might not be
the true or final theory of nature. Quantum mechanics is based on probability, where
outcomes of experiments can’t be predicted exactly and always come with some level of
uncertainty.
But ’t Hooft doesn’t just point out the problems—he also suggests a different way to look at
things. He calls his idea the "cellular automaton interpretation." In this model, he replaces
every uncertain or random value with a fixed, well-defined one. This removes the use of
probability and makes the quantum world seem less strange and more in line with other areas
of physics that follow clear, predictable rules.
However, many physicists don’t agree with his approach. They believe that the randomness
in quantum mechanics is a basic and unchangeable part of how the universe works.
What do you think? Do you agree with ’t Hooft's view?
