At the request of the author, this post has been removed.
Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor tradition; nor rumor; nor what is in a scripture; nor surmise; nor axiom; nor specious reasoning; nor bias towards one’s beliefs; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' When you yourselves know: 'These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,' enter on and abide in them.
"[Quantum mechanics] works perfectly well, but no one knows exactly what it talks about, nor what kind of reality it describes!"
ReplyDelete- Klein, Étienne and Lachièze-Rey, Marc. 1999. The Quest for Unity: The Adventure of Physics. [trans. Axel Reisinger] Oxford University Press, p.98. (Klein and Lachièze-Rey are scientists with the Atomic Energy Commission, Sacey, France.)
"The fundamental laws of nature control a substratum of which we cannot form a mental picture without introducing irrelevancies."
- Paul Dirac. Principles of Quantum Mechanics. 4th Ed. 1958.
"I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics."
- Richard Feynman. The Character of Physical Law (1965)
(Hint these quotes are from people who have some genuine claims to understanding Quantum Mechanics)
Adrian Chan-Wyles is, like many others, just making stuff up using Quantum jargon. I now have pre-written responses to this kind of misuse of science:
http://jayarava.blogspot.com/2010/10/erwin-schrodinger-didnt-have-cat.html
http://jayarava.blogspot.com/2010/08/rebirth-and-scientific-method.html
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNew age self help thinkers love quantum physics because you can use it to apparently support all sorts of highly speculative notions. Quantum physics doesn't really support this kind of 'quantum conciousness' theorising - it's very speculative at best.
ReplyDeleteAs for the relevance of quotes from those who founded the science of quantum mechanics, going back 50 years, yes it is relevant because quantum mechanics hasn't changed much and importantly there is no agreed or demonstrated understanding of what quantum mechanics is 'really' describing, not in 1958 and not now. There are still a number of interpretations and none of them has been proven. There has been a shift away from the 'human observation collapses wave functions' version of the Copenhagen Interpretation.
I don't think the FWBO can seriously lecture anyone about making stuff-up. Nice try though.
ReplyDeleteWhere'd the article go???
ReplyDelete