boundaries of observed science

"It is possible to ask whether there is still concealed behind the statistical universe of perception a ‘true’ universe in which the law of causality would be valid. But such speculation seems to us to be without value and meaningless, for physics must confine itself to the description of the relationship between perceptions" -About the intuitive content of quantum mechanics and kinematics, Journal of Physics, Heisenberg 1927, pg 197

The above quote in my opinion is the bedrock of modern science. Einstein, however, disagreed with this. Einstein believed that science describes the objective universe independent of our observation. But Neils Bohr and Heisenberg were of the opinion that the universe exists as we 'observe' it and not in its 'true' sense. In other words, Bohr opined that science simply describes how matter is observed to behave and not the constitutional nature of matter itself implying that science is limited to our perception of the universe and does not describe the 'true' universe. The quote above captures this idea.

When scientists, therefore, pose questions and quantify evidence within the confines of observed behavior of the universe, then the laws of nature as defined by science is merely in fact laws of 'observed' nature and not 'true' nature. Quite often the boundaries between these two exclusive ideas have been purposefully amalgamated.

What is the nature of the universe in its existential true objective state is not explicable within the boundaries of observed science. We have to look for answers elsewhere!

 Hare Krishna