QM is neither from a science level QM does not explain anything it simply creates a framework that predicts answers nothing more nothing less.
so QM is a prediction service that predicts?
does it predict a single answer or a huge range of answers?
a single answer is an answer.
a huge range of answers is a guess.
Science's only roll is to be useful and predict results. In that regard QM is 100% and has never yet been shown to give a wrong answer.
so obviously QM has never answered with a single answer
and has only guessed with a huge range of answers.
like throwing a ball and guessing where it will land.
Unfortunately for all that it doesn't explain why things behave like they do.
you would think that QM never being wrong in its guesses
would have built up a base of data that would have the
capabilities of explaining why things behave like they do.
which tells me that they are wrong more than they are
right ... ie
if the range is from 1 to 1000 and 555 is the result
then QM was right 1 time and wrong 999 times.
On the other scale we have Classical physics which gives countless wrong answers which is why we don't use it as it isn't terrible useful beyond stuff layman may encounter.
non laymen use classical physics to build the equipment
that QM uses to do things such as the einstein boseman condensate , without classical physics quantum physics
could do nothing except guess and never would know if 1
of the answers in the predicted range of answers is the
and if quantum physics isn't fake then why does it use
since it does nothing except predict results using
math then the use of fake math in QM proves that quantum
physics is fake and its results are faked by association.
claiming a close proximity to a observed result
as a answer is the same thing that occurs in classic
mechanics without using fake math.
when you say "Classical physics which gives countless wrong answers" I simply think about the horde of wrong answers
in the range of answers in QM.
Im going to predict that if I throw a ball into the air
the ball will land somewhere on the earth.
my predictions so far are 100% correct!
I know this because I observed everything in the cosmos
moving away from the ball as I threw it ... and I observed the ball as it lost its gravity due to its motionless in my reference frame as it appeared to stop in midair for a
moment in time before the ball gained its gravity back
and accelerated faster because its momentum was increasing
as the cosmos moved back toward the ball due to its increasing momentum and kinetic energy or its gravity.
so that explains why a falling object accelerates while
the cosmos is falling towards it.