An interesting interview with Carver Mead

It's possible Mead is just re-casting quantum mechanics in a new
framework - if it produces the same mathematical results, then really
it's just a question of philosophical stance. It's often a very tough
thing to actually understand these different recastings as being the
same or not. Some well-known examples:

Schrodinger: wave mechanics - see
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%F6dinger_equation
Heisenberg: matrix mechanics -
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrix_mechanics
Dirac - operator theory - http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bra-ket_notation
(von Neumann gave this a rigorous mathematical basis)
Feynman - many paths approach (functional integral) -
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_integral
and Feynman diagrams - http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feynman_diagram
Bohm - hidden variables theory -
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohm_interpretation
Everett - many-worlds interpretation

And there are at least half a dozen other formulations of the basic
quantum theory that I've seen. All of them are, at the bottom,
mathematically equivalent. It's kind of amazing how many different
perspectives there are on it.

Arthur