Theories are not really theories. They are
commentaries and interpretations. The real theories are quite simple. A teenager
can understand them. What’s necessary is wisdom. Intelligence can help. But it’s
a mere catalyst. IQ doesn’t count when you realize the truth. IQ only helps, it
never does the thing. Wisdom is seeing through appearances. Wisdom is seeing everything
in its fundamental level.
Intelligence
is like a commentary or an interpretation. It’s like dealing with everything as
chemicals, metals, molecules, energy, liquids, solids……… and etc. wisdom is
dealing with everything as quanta. Wisdom cannot me memorized or measured in
conventional ways. Wisdom cannot be even thought. But knowledge and intelligence
can be. That’s why those mere catalysts are so much revered. People talk much
about good stuff. But rarely pays any attention to great marvels. Just think
about how much people talk about some BMW or a Benz and how much they talk
about a limited edition like Lamborghini
Veneno Roadster.
THERE IS NO TEACHING IN PHYSICS
As I have grown older, I have come more and
more to the conclusion that there is no teaching
In physics, there is only inspiration to
learn. ... The teacher may stimulate the mind of the student...
But the journey to that goal must be made by
the student himself.
Think what would happen if the schooling system
was based on this. True there are so many wired equations and stuff in Quantum
Mechanics. But those things are just commentaries. Yep, that’s what they are. Each
one of those complex equations and stuff are either instruments (tools for
calculation) or some commentary. When I learn QM many times I feel like they
are trying to prove and axiom or over-complicating something because some guys
can’t digest simplicity.
[W]e cannot think of any object
apart from the
possibility of its connection with
other things.
Wittgenstein, Tractatus, 2.0121.
If everything that we call
‘‘being’’ and ‘‘nonbeing’’
consists in the existence and
nonexistence
of connections between elements,
it
makes no sense to speak of an
element’s being
(non-being)... . Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations,
50.
It happened to him as it always
happens to those
who turn to science... simply to
get an answer to
an everyday question of life.
Science answered
thousands of other very subtle and
ingenious
questions... but not the one he
was trying to
solve. Tolstoy, Resurrection, Part 2, Chapter 30.
[I]n our description of nature the
purpose is not
to disclose the real essence of
the phenomena but
only to track down, so far as it
is possible, relations
between the manifold aspects of
our experience.
Bohr2
I. WHAT QUANTUM MECHANICS IS
TRYING TO
TELL US
I would like to describe an attitude toward
quantum mechanics
problems that continue to plague the subject,
at least sets
them in a rather different perspective. This
point of view
alters somewhat the language used to address
these issues—a
glossary is provided in Appendix C—and it may
offer a less
perplexing basis for teaching quantum
mechanics or explaining
it to nonspecialists. It is based on one
fundamental insight,
perhaps best introduced by an analogy.
My complete answer to the late 19th century
question
‘‘what is electrodynamics trying to tell us’’
would simply be
this:
Fields in empty space have
physical reality; the
medium that supports them does
not.
Having thus removed the mystery from
electrodynamics, let
me immediately do the same for quantum
mechanics:
Correlations have physical
reality; that which
they correlate does not.
The first proposition probably sounded as
bizarre to most late
19th century physicists as the second sounds
to us today; I
expect that the second will sound as boringly
obvious to late
21st century physicists as the first sounds to
us today.
And that’s all there is to it. The rest is
commentary.
If you like you can read the commentary fromhere. But the commentary is not really necessary. Commentary is just a mode of
communication. It’s like words. Knowing all the equations is like knowing the
word and grammar. It helps but to compulsory to be enlightened. Don’t ditch the
equations. But understand that they are just some guy’s explanation. I
developed a theory which I called “Perception Theory” at that time, all on my
own while I was just 15. It say quite the same thing what Quantum Information
Theory says. Actually QIT only grasps about 60% of what my theory grasped at
that time. I didn’t even use a single equation in developing the theory (which
made it loose the calculation aspects of it). Now the thing is almost no one
would get a single thing (even a wise one) if I don’t personally coach him/her
for an hour or two at least.
Trust
me, those equations and crappy interpretations worth a lot; but not for your
personal understanding. You can live even without knowing a single word. But
knowing words can help you a real lot. Don’t get hooked up in to the so called
theories. They are not theories most of the time. They are just different
peoples interpretations. The only proper way to teach something is by being
heuristic. You’ll have to re-interpret everything for yourself. Having a PhD
or not is none of the concerns. Most of the PhD holders are just a bunch of
parrots. Most of them (or their entitlements) don’t worth a shit.
Just walk your own path. Not knowing your way
around someone else’s interpretation or commentary doesn’t prove your
inability. Knowing your way around them certainly proves your ability. But that
ability is just a bonus for yourself; it’s not something compulsory for your transcendence.
No comments:
Post a Comment