scott777ab wrote: QUESTION 5: Do you agree or disagree that quantum mechanics seems to break down the normal laws of physics when you move from the macro level to the sub micro level?
I am more inclined to say I disagree, to be honest. Sure, to the layman, and especially considering all the misinterpretations the media and woo people spread quantum mechanics seems to be now what electricity was a century ago: magical. However, it happens to account for a good deal of phenomena, and makes remarkably accurate predictions in both its own field and in others. So counterintuitive as it may appear to be from the outside, if nothing else, it works, and it couldn't, if it was in strong incompatibility with earlier models such as relativity.
That being said, I'm no authority on quantum mechanics just yet and feel deeply uncomfortable judging its merits or implications from the superficial, nay, negligible knowledge that I have. However, I am a physics major and thus I may or may not have more to say on this topic in a few years.
As for the logical absolutes, since they are ultimately tautologous in nature, there is hardly a way for them to be wrong. Every fault with them that has been presented so far lied not so much with the principles as with misapplication of semantics and resulting fallacies. Cases where contradictions were saught where none were present, equivocation fallacies, mistakings of map and territory and similar structural mistakes. Where no fallacy is employed, the axioms are true. They really can't help but be true, either. In the end, if there can be absolute certainty about anything, this would have to be it - again, just due to the fact that they are tautologous and tautologies just can't help but be true.
