Random Rant: I'm sick and tired of seeing Quantum Mechanics abused

[Mike 03]

It's very true that there are mysteries about Quantum Mechanics; that there are puzzles, immeasurables, the potential for low-probability events that seem to occur under certain circumstances that, by our current thinking, make no sense.

But there is nothing in Quantum Theory that proves there is Life after Death, or that we live in some Matrix world where everything we see is a product of our imagination and will, or that we exist in 26 dimensions...

Every time someone postures a serious question about a puzzling phenomenon, somebody will post and say it's just due to "quantum mechanics."

It drives me fucking nuts.

"Quantum theory" is not some kind of "Get out of jail" free card that explains every fucking thing that we don't understand.

Rant over. Sorry.

[Xipe Totec]

1. I'm sorry, but when I bring my FTL drive in for a 50,000 light year check up

I expect the quantum mechanic to wipe the quarks from his feet before getting in the cockpit.

The last thing I want is quantum entanglement when I'm going through a wormhole...

You can't blame me for abusing the guy.

[trof]

2. Quantom Mechanics Abusers have to register in our town.

Everyone knows where they live.
We keep the kids away from them.

[Rabrrrrrr]

3. And I also object to the use of "quantum" to mean REALLY REALLY FUCKING INSANE OH-MY-GOD IT'S SO BIG

"It's a quantum change!"

"It's a total quantum leap, everything's different!"



Idiots.

Morons shouldn't be allowed to talk math or science. Or biology. Or anything that requires a base of knowledge.

[TZ]

4. Well then

GD would be awfully quiet....:rofl:

[Pacifist Patriot]

6. Serious question here. What is the moral responsibility scientists have...

to translate their work into terms lay people can understand? This question was brought up at the Humanist Institute last week and will be of primary focus when we reconvene in August for our session on Science. To what degree do we facilitate moronic assumptions because we dismiss the laity as unworthy of our attention?

[TZ]

9. Its kinda a two way street.

Most scientists I know feel it IS part of their duty to translate what they are doing for public consumption. Unfortunately alot of stuff is not easily translatable and most people do not have/want to take the time or effort to understand the concepts.
I have tried time and again to explain as simply as I can some very complex scientific issues on DU.. (I have a very long vaccine essay I wrote for DU in my journal for example) most of the time, many people dismiss the complex issues in favor of the simple --like I'm a shill, I"m lying or I'm not really a scientist..When you are faced with a populace who seems UNINTERESTED in learning..well..it makes it that much harder.
I'm always glad to simplify what I know for people if they ask. Problem is--most aren't interested.

[tigereye]

10. is it a moral responsibility? Intriguing question!

This is one the most interesting questions I have seen here of late. Couldn't you argue then that any complex discipline has that responsibility?


My husband and I debate issues regarding science, all the time. I end up defending it, and he often feels that science itself is like a religion in it's inability to "think outside the box" of scientific method. It's ironic because he's a software developer and I'm a mental health practitioner.

[TZ]

11. ah the science as religion argument

I hate it...complete bs IMO . Science is a set of tools used to desribe the world around us ...it is NOT a belief system ...

[Pacifist Patriot]

12. I personally do not equate science with religion, but...

do have to admit there are people who replace the role of religion with science. Once upon a time (narrative never quite escapes us does it?), religion was used to answer the questions science answers for us today. Which is why some people do make that corrolation. And while science does provide us with a set of tools it is also predicated upon human assumptions that may or may not hold up to reality. Hence the Kuhnian paradigm shift. I think there are people who use it as a belief system and in that respect it would serve as their religion. Whether or not that is advisable is a completely different question.

[Rabrrrrrr]

16. At one level, it is sort of like a religion - in the sense that it's a set of rules

and processes, a specific orthodoxy of praxis and self-verification; that's a "religion" that has belief in the validity of the scientific process and it's ability to describe what we observe, if we define religion as being a belief in something that helps us to understand who/what we are in the world/universe.

However, I do think too many of the rightist asshats who are afraid of science, when they talk about "science as religion" aren't being anywhere near that nuanced. But then, I'm a fucking Einstein in comparison to them, so this is not surprising. I think they mean to say "Hey, you scientists, you believe in 'science' - how is that any different than believing in God?"

But, they're really fucking dumb, and shouldn't be allowed to speak in public, except to one another.

I certainly don't know of any scientist who worships "science" or "scientific method", or prays to "science" or whatever the hell else the loonybin jackass rightwing would have us believe that scientists do. I also don't believe that scientists are praying to "Atheism", "Satan" or "secular humanism". God, I hate the insane wings of religionists.

And unlike the rightist shitiot response to religion which is to fearfully close the gates and shutter the windows, the results of the scientific "religion" (theories and hypotheses) are adaptable and changeable, BUT ALSO, even the very foundational orthodoxy is malleable when needed, cf. Keppler, Einstein, Heisenberg, Crick and Watson, et. al.

The shitiots refuse to adjust to anything, whether it's scientific, political, geographic, social, economic, intellectual, or artistic changes.

[tigereye]

32. did you see the thread about people walking out on Bill Nye the Science

Guy when he was talking about moonlight coming from the sun? Sigh. That kind of thing gives sane people of faith a bad name.


"even the very foundational orthodoxy is malleable when needed, cf. Keppler, Einstein, Heisenberg, Crick and Watson, et. al."

Some foundational scientific orthodoxy can become a raison d'etre (?) though, when it isn't malleable enough to examine some of it's underpinnings and be open to practices considered "woo-woo" by the faithful.

[Pacifist Patriot]

15. I would say a specific set of ethics and morality are intrinsic to any profession/discipline.

We have to be honest and acknowledge that there are scientists who are ostracized when their theories (or results!) contradict prevailing scientific findings. So in that respect it ccan have an inability to "think outside the box." I hate to fall back on "human nature," but we do tend to ignore findings that contradict our expectations and add emphasis to those that comply with our expectations. Sometimes it takes real vision and courage for scientific breakthroughs to become reality as we know it.

[Rabrrrrrr]

13. I'm with TZ - I think there's a moral obligation on the part of scientists,

but there's also a moral obligation on the part of the non-scientific to at least fucking try. And sadly, only about 2% of the American population actually fucking cares enough to try.

They'd rather be reading "Masturbate to these Cars!" magazine, or watching American Idol, or reading another dumbed-down ignorant Rick Warren "Jesus wants you to be rich!!!!!!!!!!" book, none of the suggestions of which they intend to actually take anyway.

I fucking hate it when scientists are on TV shows, because, unless it's an NPR show or Daily Show or Colbert, the host unfailingly fucks things up, keeps the scientist from actually explaining what the issue is, and otherwise interferes with the delivery of the message. Sometimes - on the part of the rightwing shills (the few times they'll actually interview an actual scientist, and a Bob Jones University 'expert') - they deliberately misconstrue what the scientist is saying so as to show their illliterati viewership "See! These 'scientists' are just out there trying to screw up your lives and take over by making sure you don't understand anything!"

[Hanse]

24. I'd say if someone wants to understand quantum mechanics...

they have the moral obligation to learn the calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, and fundamental physics that quantum mechanics requires to be understood.

[petronius]

19. Actually, I'll take "quantum leap" over "paradigm shift" any day

When someone says "quantum leap," it at least gives me the chance to nostalgiacize about a cool TV show while I ignore whatever ignorant tripe they continue to spout...

[Pacifist Patriot]

5. I'm sick and tired of Quantum Leap being abused.

No, in all seriousness, I completely sympathize with what you are saying. I am a member of the humanist clergy and see quantum physics misunderstood and misapplied regularly in a religious context. Rant away.

[UndertheOcean]

7. Most of this mumbo jumbo comes from people you don't understand the Math behind it .

[old mark]

8. Well, they don't have to be so greasey - use some soap!!!11! nt

[SoxFan]

14. Nice post, Daniel Faraday

[baldguy]

17. But, they're so small - you can hardly see them.

[Duer 157099]

18. “If quantum mechanics hasn't profoundly shocked you, you haven't understood it yet"

--Niels Bohr

[Odin2005]

22. Unfortunately Bohr's philsophical biases play a large part in sustaining the BS about QM.

The so-called "Copenhagen Interpretation" of QM, that observation collapses the probability waves, is just that, a PHILOSOPHICAL INTERPRETATION of QM, one of many interpretations of QM out there, it IS NOT itself QM.

[DS1]

20. Is this rant quantumly random, or not very random at all? I can't tell

[petronius]

23. What was in here before you opened the thread?

:shrug:

[DS1]

25. The Freeper Continuum, of course

[Odin2005]

21. Woo-woos bastardizing QM are a HUGE pet peeve of mine.

Deepak Chopra is a prime example of those imbeciles.

[Rabrrrrrr]

30. Deepak Chopra - that fucking asshole is so full of pretend fucking woo

I'm surprised the anti-trust part of the government isn't after him.

And considering the kind of "love everyone" new-agey community-based woo that he peddles, the guy is a total cock in person. Rude, unfriendly, pretentious, classist...

total dick.

[Solon]

26. Its 11 dimensions dammit!

I have the equations to prove it too. x(

:P

[rucky]

27. For what they charge an hour to fix a lousy car, they deserve a little abuse.

[MilesColtrane]

29. Most quantum mechanics are worth it.

I went to that "Just Quarks" place once trying to save some money.....what a rip off!!

[jobycom]

28. Me, too. It was the best James Bond film ever, and I'm tired of those lame critics

who claim it had too much plot.

[struggle4progress]

31. I was planning to learn it so I could tunnel through walls or randomly switch between acting

like a wave and acting like a particle

But the only the books on it that I could find were full of useless yada-yada about Planck's constant and the Bohr atom and Clebsch-Gordon coefficients and spin and irreducible group representations and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle as a theorem about Fourier series and spectroscopy and other weird stuff like that

Sometimes the only sane reaction is WTF were these guys smokin?