I like your clarification of the Uncertainty Principle here @a-non-e-moose. If my textbooks and teachers were to be a guide, the simple act of observation, not some variable that's being introduced by my attempts to observe, is causing some change in the thing being observed. You remove anything that sounds superstitious to me and replace it with what I'm hoping was Heisenberg's actual point. Earlier this evening while I was reviewing its meaning with an online search, I strangely couldn't find any actual quotes from Heisenberg on the meaning of the principle that has his namesake attached to it. Go figure.

I'll have to agree with @valued-customer here about physics though. If our theories of the physical world aren't consistent with each other, then it's a certainty that one or both theories function based on at least one false assumption, and probably a big one. My guess is that when we discover what those false assumptions are, it will similarly make the math much simpler and our understanding of physical phenomena will become more intuitive and describable with simpler terms. Just because some genius can make the math work doesn't mean it's describing the physical world. It's a just a piece of evidence that says it may be possible.

When Copernicus placed the sun at the center of the solar system, everything that was being observed in heavenly bodies suddenly made a lot more sense, and the motions of the planets could now be explained in a way that even a small child can understand. Not so much when the earth was assumed to be the center of the universe. It seemed impossibly complex and chaotic, and only a few geniuses were able to make the math work in a way that could predict the motions of the planets and sun. My gut tells me that the field of physics will have a similar aha moment, shattering the impossibly complex theories being worked out today.