Stern-Gerlach experiment demonstrates the spin of the electron being either up or down after going through the magnet apparatus, and the spin cannot be predicted. My question is: Is the indeterminacy and randomness of the spin an inherent and fundamental property of quantum mechanics? Or is it possible there's “something” that’s making those electrons spin a certain way that we’re not aware of and not measuring with our instruments? And can that “something” be measured if we had good enough instruments eventually in the future?
I guess to look at it another way, replace the Stern-Gerlach experiment with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, which states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa. Is this uncertainty fundamental to the theory or is it based on experimental results with old instruments (hence the probabilistic description of one variable based on the complete measurement of the other in this position-momentum pair)? (Edit: Answer: The uncertainty is fundamental to this principal because it is the result of combining particle and wave nature) Is it possible we can have better instruments in the future that are good enough to measure both with certainty or is that impossible since instruments are not the issue? (Edit: Answer: Nope, you cannot measure both accurately, instruments are not the issue)
I’m interested because of the Bohr-Einstein debates. From my understanding, Albert Einstein, quoted as saying, “I, at any rate, am convinced that He [God] does not throw dice,” hated the notion that everything on the atomic and subatomic scale is random, and tried to find ways to explain that quantum determinism might in fact be a possibility. But Niels Bohr shot down any of Einstein’s attempts and it is generally accepted that Bohr “won” the debates.
So are we to go with Bohr and accept that everything in the microcosm is a random clusterfuck of chaos in opposite and stark contrast to determinism? Or is it because it seems random because we’ve might have missed something and are limited to what our instruments can currently measure, and is it possible we can overcome those limitations in the future?
I’ve always thought the randomness was inherent and fundamental to quantum mechanics, as Bohr proved there was no missing variable to be accounted for (which was what Einstein tried to go for in these debates). And the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle says it’s not a question of the limitations of the measuring apparatus, but that having an instrument that can measure everything (which can lead to 100% prediction models) is in fact an impossible idea since the underlying quantum mechanics is fundamentally random.
Am I wrong here? Please help a physics noob out!