[ExI] New Carlo Rovelli book challenges science's understanding of reality and the universe

[BillK]

<
https://www.npr.org/2026/09/14/nx-s1-5968442/on-the-equality-of-all-things-physics-carlo-rovelli
>
  September 14, 2026 By Adam Frank
Book review of "On the Equality of All Things" - Lessons on Physics and
Philosophy By Carlo Rovelli

This article is a review of the view of quantum mechanics called the
relational interpretation.
Quote:
For some physicists, it was so important to get that Ultimate Reality back
that they invented interpretations of quantum physics that claimed the
universe splits into separate parallel versions of itself when the box is
opened. Rovelli thinks these attempts are nonsense. For him, the lesson of
quantum mechanics is relationality. Everything exists only in relation to
everything else. That means the properties of a system – any object – are
always relational properties. There is no way to see them from an ultimate
or absolute perspective because there are no ultimate or absolute
perspectives.
----------------------------

This is new to me, so I asked Qwen AI to provide a review and discussion.
BillK

Qwen3.8-Max Thinking:

Based on the article published by NPR on September 14, 2026, here is a
review and discussion of the themes presented in Carlo Rovelli's latest
book, *On the Equality of All Things*.
Overview of the Article
The NPR article serves as a review of Carlo Rovelli's new book, positioning
him not just as a preeminent theoretical physicist, but as a philosopher of
science challenging the modern scientific establishment’s "triumphalism."
The core thesis highlighted in the review is Rovelli’s rejection of the
"God’s-eye view" of the universe. Instead of seeking an ultimate, objective
reality that exists independently of observation, Rovelli argues for a
fundamentally relational universe where "everything exists only in relation
to everything else."
Key Themes and Arguments
*1. The Rejection of Scientific Triumphalism* The most striking element of
the review is Rovelli’s direct assault on the idea that physics can
"explain everything." The article quotes Rovelli explicitly: *"Physics is
often credited with a power it does not have: that of exhausting what can
be known about the world. This is nonsense. Knowing the physical laws of
the world does not amount to knowing the world."*

   - *Discussion:* This is a profound epistemological stance. By
   distinguishing between *knowing the laws* and *knowing the world*,
   Rovelli pushes back against strict reductionism—the idea that if you
   understand the quantum states of particles, you understand human
   consciousness, culture, or art. He argues for a pluralistic view of reality
   where physics is just one valid perspective among many, rather than the
   ultimate "source code" of existence.

*2. Relational Quantum Mechanics (RQM)* The review delves into Rovelli’s
championing of the Relational Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.

   - *The Problem:* Traditional physics assumes objects have properties
   (like position or momentum) even when no one is looking. Quantum mechanics
   complicated this, leading some physicists to invent "Many-Worlds" theories
   to save the idea of a singular, objective reality.
   - *Rovelli’s Solution:* Rovelli dismisses these workarounds as
   "nonsense." He argues that properties are strictly relational. An electron
   doesn't *have* a position; it has a position *relative* to a specific
   observer or measuring device. As the article notes, *"we never leave the
   circle of perspectives."*
   - *Discussion:* This aligns Rovelli with a long philosophical lineage of
   relationalism (dating back to Leibniz and Mach) but grounds it in hard
   quantum data. It suggests that "reality" is essentially a network of
   interactions. If there is no interaction, there are no defined properties.
   This elegantly solves many quantum paradoxes but requires us to abandon the
   intuitive idea of a "static" universe sitting there waiting to be
   discovered.

*3. The Human Bias of Absolute Space and Time* The article points out how
our evolutionary environment tricks us. Because we live on a solid surface
with fixed reference points (mountains, trees), we intuitively believe in
"solid objects" and "absolute motion."

   - *Discussion:* Rovelli uses Einstein’s relativity to shatter this
   illusion, showing that time and space are not a fixed stage but a dynamic,
   malleable fabric. The article effectively highlights how our terrestrial
   biases are the biggest obstacle to understanding the cosmos. We must
   constantly fight our own intuition to accept that the universe does not
   care about our human-centric concepts of "now" or "here."

*4. Science as an Act of Humility and Intimacy* Far from being a defeatist
view, the article portrays Rovelli’s stance as a source of profound beauty.
By accepting that we cannot have an absolute view of the universe, we are
invited into a more intimate relationship with it. Science becomes a
creative effort of seeking knowledge within our limits, rather than a quest
for total domination over nature’s secrets.

   - *Discussion:* This highlights Rovelli’s signature lyrical style. While
   many physicists view the "observer effect" in quantum mechanics as an
   annoying glitch to be solved, Rovelli embraces it as the fundamental
   feature of existence: we are not standing outside the universe looking in;
   we are deeply embedded within it, interacting constantly with it.

Critical Analysis
The NPR review successfully captures why Rovelli remains one of the most
important public intellectuals in science today. He bridges the widening
gap between the hard sciences and the humanities.

   - *Strengths of the Argument:* Rovelli’s humility is refreshing in an
   era where tech billionaires and pop-science authors often claim that
   physics is on the verge of "solving" reality. By admitting that physics
   *cannot* exhaust what is known about the world, Rovelli leaves room for
   philosophy, art, and human experience without dismissing them as
   "illusions."
   - *Potential Controversies:* Hardcore proponents of scientific realism
   (who believe there *is* one objective truth independent of us) will
   likely find Rovelli’s "relational" view frustrating. To them, saying
   "reality is just interactions" sounds like giving up on finding out what is
   actually interacting. However, Rovelli would likely counter that asking
   what exists *outside* of interaction is a meaningless question—like
   asking what is North of the North Pole.

Conclusion
The article presents *On the Equality of All Things* as a necessary
corrective to the arrogance of modern science. It suggests that the
ultimate lesson of both Einstein and Bohr is not that we have found the
absolute truth, but that the absolute truth is a mirage. Instead, we have a
universe of infinite perspectives, all equally real, all fundamentally
connected. For readers looking to understand the philosophy behind the
physics, this review suggests Rovelli's latest work is both a compelling
and essential read.
-------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20260915/c595fcb2/attachment.htm>