Blog post argues fundamental physics has made no new ontological discoveries since the Dirac equation (1928), mistaking mathematical models for physical theories.
Key Takeaways
QM’s interpretation debate persists because QM is a probability calculus (mathematical model), not a physical theory; all interpretations make identical predictions.
Every confirmed BSM prediction since 1973 (W/Z, top quark, Higgs, gravitational waves) confirmed ontological commitments made before 1973, not new ones.
The Standard Model only catalogs internal labels (color, weak isospin, hypercharge, generation index) inside the 1928 ontology; it adds no new physical structure.
Heisenberg’s matrix mechanics is structurally analogous to ML function approximators: both reproduce data without committing to what generates it, with the same out-of-distribution failure modes.
Real physical theories (GR, Dirac equation) predict novel phenomena (gravitational waves, antimatter) as consequences of ontological commitment, not data fitting.
