I would like to examine more fully the context of that quote, but as far as I have read, his philosophy on the subject is bunk.
I have to state that his proposal can be put this way:
The limits of our measuring tools are the limits of the universe.
Following this logic, if the tree falls and no one is there to see or hear it, it doesn't fall at all. But any person with a developed brain learns object permanence. When mommy and daddy go "peek a boo!" and then cover their faces with their hands, they don't disappear from existence. They are hidden behind their hands. The same with position and velocity.
So, which shell is the pea under? Velocity or position?
When people hear "observing a phenomenon changes it" they are bamboozled, because they don't know what measuring devices are being used. If you say, "Observing someone changes them fundamentally by the act of observing" they may or may not understand. But when you add, "Well, by 'observe' I mean eviscerate so we can get a look at their insides," the picture becomes perfectly clear. The way we measure quanta often affects the nature of the quanta because we're bouncing stuff off of them!
Much of what you propose is a regression not only historically in terms of the progress of reason, but even the progress of basic cognitive ability and mental functioning acquired early in childhood. In this light, the new age is quite literally retarded.
Try this on for size:
http://www.skepticreport.com/tools/quantum.htm
[This message has been edited by babayada (edited August 25, 2005).]
