RE: Does quantum theory really require so much weirdness? No! There is an unpopular real model that explains the quantum.
I cannot check the video (am in a place where I can't get the sound), but great post on a great topic.
The pilot wave model does not contradict quantum mechanics, and additionally restore the notion of particle trajectories (that is lost in quantum mechanics). However, it cannot be really tested as well as those trajectories does not bring anything with respect to a comparison with data. They are some kind of hidden variables.
The nasty part of the pilot wave model is that you need to introduce a kind of quantum potential with weird properties, like being non-vanishing for infinite distances. In some sense, you trade one thing people generally dislike for another that is also disliked.
To sum up, there is today no experimental way to disentangle both theories, but maybe, someone will find some day a way to prove one or the other :).
Thank you for your well informed reply.
Although all theories will probably get to a place where reality is almost impossible to rationalize and require another breakthrough, I find that the pilot waves explain a lot where other models just go weird. Both the Copenhagen Interpretation and Pilot Wave models require infinite distances for entanglement.
Yes maybe one day someone, maybe Lemouth, will figure out a clever experiment that can distinguish between the 2 models. I'm just a believer that reality is real, but I could be wrong. Many times there are simple explanations for very complex concepts.
To me, the main intriguing issue in QM is non-locality. The latter is still there with the pilot wave model.
Probably not me, as I am currently not working on the foundation of QM but more within its practical applications in particle physics ;)
Yes, non-locality is very strange and perplexing.
It's truly amazing that our math predicts experimental results with such accuracy even with so many unresolved questions.