“Local realism” is a world view in which the properties of physical objects exist independent of whether or not they are observed (realism), and in which no physical influence can propagate faster than the speed of light (locality). ... Although most scientists do not expect any surprises and believe that quantum physics will prevail over local realism, it is still conceivable that different loopholes are exploited in different experiments.
To be fair, it is also possible that realism holds but locality is violated (e.g., when entangled particles are measured, they somehow quietly "signal" to each other, faster than light, their result), but I don't think many are holding their breaths. Much easier for a working physicist to not worry about what the universe was "already like" before being measured, and leave that to philosophers.
PadmaVonSamba wrote:Some people refuse to believe that there is anything that exists independent of the subject who observes them
Are you familiar with (the idea of) coemergent appearance in Mahamudra? Or more generally, with non-duality? How can the "subjective" and "objective" aspects of experience / reality be simultaneously co-dependent and independent?
Could it be that with increasing certainty in the distinction between mind and the nature of mind, the practitioner sees how mind is merely another manifestation of the nature of mind, and invests increasingly less faith in its "brilliant" conclusions? Could this be why practice is so essential in resolving this point?
If you really think accomplished Mahamudra practitioners are crazy for giving up the idea that consciousness is caused by matter, wouldn't it make sense to stop practicing now, lest you go crazy too?