Two days ago, in Nautil.us, he has presented a very clear proof that the critics of quantum mechanics are just another branch of the loony far left activists:
Well, Brooks has found an excellent and original proof that quantum mechanics has to be destroyed and replaced by a Bohmian pseudoscience. What is the proof? "For years", Brooks has been talking to Gerolamo Cardano (1501-1576), an Italian polymath, co-author of the complex calculus, astrologer, gambler, biologist, designer of the gimbal ("Cardan suspension"), and a guy harassed by the Inquisition since 1570, among other things.
Brooks was able to learn quite a lot by talking to such a ghost. First of all, Cardano himself was speaking to ghosts and Brooks has learned about this state-of-the-art methodology – and decided to talk about one of the best ghosts, Cardano himself.
Also, the ghost of the 16th century astrologer told Brooks that the Inquisition hasn't disappeared as of 2019. When the powerful are threatened by progress, they will suppress debate. To fight against that danger, Brooks decided to suppress the debate among the quantum physicists ("Copenhagenists") at conferences. Quantum mechanics has to be replaced with the de Broglie-Bohm pilot wave theory whose history is sketched in Brooks' article.
Bohmian mechanics has to be the future because Bohm was prosecuted during McCarthyism just like Cardano was prosecuted by the Inquisition. And Bohr was worse than previously thought because Cardano, a critic of Bohr's ;-), has also opined that God couldn't possibly condemn devout Jews and Muslims. This multiculturalism surely makes Cardano's opinions on quantum mechanics more credible. :-D Seriously, I don't want to report these incredible claims seriously. Brooks fights against Bohr much of the time. We read, for example:
Bohr’s view (now central to the “Copenhagen” interpretation of quantum theory) was that the objects have no definite position or momentum until they hit the detector.Viable "interpretations" may express various issues differently but the non-existence of a definite position or momentum prior to the measurement isn't anyone's view or a matter of interpretations. It's a fact and it's a fact that has been discovered as a part of quantum mechanics, not a part of any particular "interpretation". It is totally wrong to use a vague language when it comes to the basic and unquestionable facts such as the uncertainty principle.
What does Brooks wish to the quantum physicists and their health?
Fortunately, the brainwashed generation is passing: The Copenhagen intepretation doesn’t dominate like it used to.He is so friendly, isn't he? By the way, it's not one generation. Contemporary college students are about the sixth generation that is learning quantum mechanics and its "Copenhagen" principles! Bohr was born in 1885 and students who are starting with quantum mechanics these days were born around 2000.
Meanwhile, Brooks is fighting for "progress". Which means to ban the uncertainty principle and return us to classical physics where the position and momentum existed simultaneously and without any measurement. And his progress involves the talking to the ultimate authorities – the ghosts of astrologers. Finally some progress – finally we get rid of the dark heritage of the Middle Ages if we talk to the ghosts frequently enough. ;-)
I just can't believe that someone who is as nutty and irrational as Michael Brooks can get away with calling himself a science writer. None of the ideas that he promotes work as a description of the body of known natural phenomena and even if there were a doubt about it, they wouldn't represent progress – they would unquestionably represent a regression.
The truth in science can't be determined by authorities, let alone 16th century authorities (clearly, 16th century thinkers didn't discuss anything that was directly relevant to the foundations of quantum mechanics), let alone their ghosts. The truth in science is determined by the evidence.
And it's completely wrong to arbitrarily identify 20th century scientists such as Niels Bohr with the Inquisition etc. Bohr has had clearly nothing to do whatsoever with the Inquisition. Also, it's absolutely wrong to defend scientific theories according to the subjective likability of their political views. Whether David Bohm was a commie – while Pascual Jordan was a staunch believer in the ideas of NSDAP – is completely irrelevant for the evaluation of the validity of their scientific propositions. I would have trouble with the political views of both of these men but their physics must clearly be considered as an entity that is independent from the men's politics.
Concerning the conferences, it's good that Brooks at least admits that the actual physicists have a much greater respect for quantum mechanics as formulated in Copenhagen than the journalistic likes of himself. When laymen read most of the mass media, they couldn't even figure out that the "Copenhagen" quantum mechanics is alive and kicking. And he's right that the "non-Copenhagen" rhetoric has been expanding even among physicists who attend conferences. But this process is clearly a pathological one. It's a process of contamination of the scientific community by the (almost completely left-wing, today) activists who have predetermined the "right" conclusions in advance. Some of these activists don't hesitate to talk to ghosts. This stuff doesn't belong to science – either of them – and once its concentration surpasses a critical threshold, the very survival of science (in the proper sense) will become unlikely.
It is these dishonest, totally unscientifically operating activists such as Michael Brooks who are brainwashing others – they are brainwashing a whole generation of the laymen. Actual scientists know that this pop science stuff in the would-be mainstream – but actually unhinged – media has nothing to do with the actual state of the science and that the "anti-Copenhagen interpreters" haven't made any progress in those 90+ years whatsoever. But the future of science is in jeopardy because an increasingly complete percentage of kids are confined to the box of unscientific garbage such as the garbage from Michael Brooks' articles.
Actual scientists may really be passing but if and when they really disappear, it will herald the end of the enlightened civilization as we have known it for a few centuries.