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

Hi Schwarzwald!

You know, I don't know your first name, or if it's Mr. or Ms. But hello
Schwarzwald and thanks for the response. While I'm asking personal
questions, where are you, how good is your math, do you work with qm, ever
published a paper.

I realize the questions I asked in the last post, not those above, might
seem a bit odd to you but if you will read on I'll explain why I am asking
them as I have.

 "My pleasure. Though I don't really have a specific aim (if this was
directed at me?). I was pointing out what I saw as a very strange, myopic
standard of 'science education', expressing wonder at how scientific
literacy gets pared down to a willingness to accept belief not only in
evolution, but a rather narrowly defined evolution, and general
lamentation/curiosity at how QM remains utterly off the radar in
comparison."

Your aim in my original message should be the aim(s) of ASA. I would agree
to your other points. I would also agree that public education is poor. J.
Q. Public is undereducated, poorly informed, loves technology but doesn't
really care about science. The world lacks deep thinkers. ASA, indeed any
teacher, can only teach what others are willing to learn. Teachers answer
the questions asked or those questions that should be asked as best the can.
What questions are being asked that include both God and science? If you
looked at the questions asked and broke them down by category, which types
of questions are asked most often? As teachers we should be prepared to
answer these questions. The number of questions asked concerning both God
and science typically concern, at least in this country, questions dealing
with accepting evolution given Genesis, or from the other perspective
accepting Genesis given evolution. Few JQP's have accepted both and until
they do fewer still will be able to progress to the point of rationalizing
both QM and God. But there are those who are now asking questions on this
level and I find them interesting to talk to.

In regard to the wave particle duality, you said, "Sounds reasonable, except
what seems involved with making light, etc behave 'like a wave' or 'like a
particle' is generally regarded as key."

Exactly, figuring out what makes a particle behave as a wave would go along
way to solving some of the enigma that is involved with QM. The project I'm
developing with your help forms the basis for a presentation of a
description of what makes a particle behave as a wave.

"Sorry if I'm not of more help with these questions, but by all means, I'll
try to answer whatever you ask. The questions QM leads to (about
materialism, realism, locality, consciousness, etc) are to me the most
interesting thing, along with the experiments themselves."

You are more help than you ever could realize. It seems we share similar
interests about what QM might tell us about reality and we'll have to
explore that topic further but right now I'm focused on developing a line of
reasoning leading up to that description. At some time Einstein realized
e=mc² but if he just said to everyone e=mc², who would have taken him
seriously? He had to set out a line of reasoning based upon concepts that
all would consider valid and lead them to e=mc².

Realizing that a description of a natural phenomena that accounts for
quantum wholeness, nonlocality and wave particle duality can be made and
that all the reasonable steps are known and accepted, at least by the vast
majority of working physicists, I'm attempting to put together a
presentation that might be presentable for publication. The idea here is
simple I know of this description but few others do and apparently the
physicists don't, so I'd like to make them aware. I'm aiming for a
presentation that the experts would be able to accept. One devoid of P.O.
factors, obvious errors and dubious claims. And one that might be understood
by someone with a HS education. Putting it in simple language is not a
problem I've spent a career putting medicine in simple language for my
patients. But without having someone to discuss the other factors with I
would not be able to do it. The realization of that need, to discuss this
presentation with others was largely why I came to ASA But there are other
reasons, perhaps I would say higher reasons, why I will stay after this
project is completed.

I had prepared a paper that I thought was finished and ready for publication
but after arriving here on the list, I can see there are many changes that
will have to be made before it is acceptable to minds other than my own. So
I'm asking questions, trying to communicate ides without ambiguity: By___ do
you and I agree___? Do you agree that ___ is a widely held view? Etc. And
tying not to po anyone.

I've written enough for today. Thank you again for your interest and help.

Michael McCray

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Nov 19 15:22:05 2008