[blurbleblurble]

I spoke of "physics" first and foremost as a scientific paradigm. It's a time-honored variety of applied mathematics.

The map is not the territory, regardless of how accurately its models describe reality. The standard model is great, don't get me wrong, but it's still a map, one of many.

"Physical" models are no longer the only context where quantum tools are relevant or useful. Look into Jerome Busemeyer if you want to learn more.

[wslh]

Very interesting, thank you for the scientist reference. Looking at Wikipedia I found that "...the identification of quantum structures in cognitive phenomena does not presuppose the existence of microscopic quantum processes in the human brain.". This highlights your comment.

[Vecr]

> The map is not the territory.

Yes, that's why I spoke of GR + objective collapse. GR + objective collapse is not the territory, most people including Penrose will tell you that. What some of his readers apparently don't get is that he supports GR + objective collapse only to the extent that there's "only one true objective world" (because he likes that for aesthetic reasons), and then immediately turns around and rejects it because there's no space for free will.