![]() ![]() The core is this: when confronted with the phenomena of entanglement-including the ability to measure one qubit of an EPR pair and thereby collapse the other in a basis of one’s choice (as we’d put it today), as well as the possibility of a whole pile of gunpowder in a coherent superposition of exploding and not exploding (Einstein’s example in a letter to Schrödinger, which the latter then infamously transformed into a cat)-well, there are entire conferences and edited volumes about what Bohr and Einstein said, didn’t say, meant to say or tried to say about these matters, but in cartoon form: ![]() Now that we’re closing in on a century of quantum physics, can we finally adjudicate what Einstein and Bohr were right or wrong about in the 1920s and 1930s? (Also, how is it still even a thing people argue about?) While I can’t speak “above all,” OK, I can speak. You above all could speak of his not-so-superintelligence in quantum physics… Steve wrote:Īfter all, in many areas Einstein was no Einstein. In Steven Pinker’s guest post from last week, there’s one bit to which I never replied. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |