Re: [asa] Quantum physics, measurement problems, other implications?

Heya Christine,

I would echo this answer. Quantum physics is so complex, so
> counter-intuitive, and so abstract, it is very difficult for people like me
> (who are scientists by training but are not active researchers) to
> understand it, let alone for the non-technical, lay audience. It's not even
> addressed until college, and even then for most people, it is an elective
> course that most do not undertake. It's hard for something to be on people's
> radar screen, if they've never really even heard of it. In contrast,
> although the technical details of evolution are certainly difficult, the
> bsaics are much easier to grasp, it is much more tangible (witness the
> classic "primate to human" sketch), and it is taught at a much earlier stage
> in school (usually high school, though I had my first taste in 8th grade).
> Also, with evolution, it is immediately apparent what the implications are
> ("humans were apes" or "humans came from warm, chemical goo") whereas the
> implications of quantum
> physics are seemingly much more opaque at first glance.

I understand that response. But here's the problem I have with it.

* The desire/query I have is not to have laymen 'understanding quantum
physics' in any comprehensive sense. Indeed, the general theme among QM
physicists themselves seems to be that QM is not understood by them, and
quite possibly cannot be understood in an ultimate and meaningful sense.
Richard Feynman comes to mind, where he explicitly advises his students to
not attempt 'figuring out' QM, as it will only lead to frustration and ruin.
But the weirdness, non-intuitiveness, and potential ramifications don't
require obscure technical knowledge and math to understand. These things
become apparent with very simple illustrations, such as the twin-slit
experiment, or the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment.

* I would humbly suggest that most people who 'believe in evolution' or
claim to understand it - Christian and non-Christian alike - typically have
an abysmal grasp of it. They get 'the gist', and usually that's as far as
they go. But getting that far is apparently judged to be a success by the
standards of science advocates, who seem to primarily care about whether
'true' or 'false' is checked on surveys which ask 'Humanity evolved from
lower life forms, without any external help from a deity.' So why would it
not be enough to make people aware that the Newtonian world they are
familiar with in day to day life breaks down at (at least) the levels which
QM deals with - and that minds and consciousness seem to play a strong and
embarrassing role in this? I can practically guarantee that a high school
level student would be able to grasp these things if an animated
demonstration were provided. It's 'not on their radar screen' in part
because next to no one - certainly no advocacy groups, even broad 'science
education' advocacy groups - regard this understanding as important,
somehow.

* Keep in mind that there's another, alternative view as to why these things
are not discussed with layman audiences: Because the results speak to things
that are philosophically/metaphysically distasteful to many or most of the
scientists involved, and therefore the less people getting 'the wrong
ideas', the better. Kuttner and Rosenblum speak to this particularly in
Quantum Enigma, where they criticize the scientific community for acting
like and insisting that there's nothing fundamentally unusual and important
going on in QM, when they know better. Stapp mostly talks about the
implications, but repeatedly laments that philosophers and even scientists
typically want to go on pretending that QM discoveries never happened, and
that the whole universe is Newtonian all the way down. Certainly we can at
once agree that the ramifications of QM experiments and studies are deep and
major - yet at the same time, hardly any person or group who harps on the
importance of science education considers this knowledge important. Indeed,
there's some indication that some consider public awareness to this
undesirable, because then who knows what ideas they'll all come up with.

* I want to stress that I'm not talking about the implications and even
benefits of QM for Christian thought - I think that's a worthwhile subject,
but disconnected from what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the
bare-bones communication of A) The apparent lack of classical mechanical
rules holding at the QM level, at least, B) The strongly implied tie between
consciousness and QM, and C) The important implications this has for just
about any person's worldview, however mysterious the 'ultimate truth' of the
matter is.

Or to put it again: If we (and by that I mean mostly Christians interested
in science, particularly TE Christians) consider it so important for fellow
Christians and non-Christians to know and accept evolution because of what
it says about our world - then shouldn't we be just as concerned that those
same people know and accept the weird results of QM, and what THAT says
about our world? Once more, I won't accept that these things 'just can't be
taught easily because they're too complicated'. Not when the bar is as low
as it is for teaching people about evolution - and not when a crackpot movie
like 'What the Bleep Do We Know?' is capable of explaining the weirdness of
the twin-slit experiment, and some of its potential implications, extremely
well just by using some funny animation.

This could lead in to some other questions that I think are at least worth
talking about.

Are we concerned that people in general, and Christians in particular, are
aware of and accept evolution solely because of the perceived truth of the
matter and the importance of people understanding what their world is really
like? Or is it that, in however large or small part, we're simply
embarrassed by the lack of acceptance, because that's what our (many times,
Christian-hostile) communities demand of its members in order to be viewed
respectfully? Is our concern really that people truly understand scientific
questions on an intellectual level - or are we really after Christians
simply submitting to intellectual authority? Is the possibility for
Christians to learn about touchy, weird fundamentals like QM - issues that
have no clear answers, and may never have such answers - on some level
perceived as threatening, especially if they're left free to make up their
own minds on these subjects?

I'll give my own take on this later, I think I've written enough for now. It
came to me after I sat down and read the thoughts of several apparently
mainstream scientists' views on QM, their lamentations (specifically the
lamentations of one in particular, in a private conversation), and thought
about it in comparison to the evolution debate. Who knows - maybe others
have a similar view here.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Nov 13 21:54:11 2008