The ontological divergence
RSI argues that modern physics predicts with great precision but leaves unsettled what its mathematical entities physically are.
Quantum mechanics and quantum gravity predict the results of experiments with extraordinary precision. RSI begins from a distinction the paper draws sharply: predictive reach is not the same as explanatory depth. An equation can forecast a measurement while saying nothing about what the measured thing actually is.
The theory holds that modern physics has elevated mathematical coherence to the highest standard of truth. In doing so, it may have traded physical clarity for formal elegance. The formalisms work with remarkable precision, yet the ontological status of the entities they invoke remains unsettled. (Ontology is the study of what really exists.)
This divergence between description and explanation is the starting point for RSI. The framework does not question the brilliance of current theories. It asks a different question: what physical reality do those successful equations describe?
From the paper: Chapter I, The Ontological Divergence: A Critique of Descriptive Formalism. Read the full section
Have a question about this idea, or want to check the numbers?
Ask RSI about this idea