The interviewer clearly didn’t understand a word this guy said.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

Bro. Mario “Neither is the fact that he did not rule out the possibilty of a divine intellect, but rather only admitted that such a thing is not a good explanation for any scientist, since scientists always look for explanations within the data, not above and beyond it”—this is your interpretation of what Vedral said, which may be inaccurate.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

It seemed to me he was saying that postulating god as an answer to the manifestation of the physical world introduced unnecessary complexity. The job of physics being to simplify, once we have these laws derived, to suggest something bigger, more complex and unknowable is not satisfactory and fairly meaningless. And that the probability would be very low for an intellectual creator. Which I guess means if there were this magical deity beyond all law the informational value of its existence would be huge. Also he said ‘it’ when referring to a hypothetical creator, which is nice to hear.

You don't have permission to flag this entry.