3 ms·
I was never happy with this statement. Because obviously we can make very accurate predictions by applying quantum mechanics. The problem with this statement i
by s-macke 11y ago
I was never happy with this statement. Because obviously we can make very accurate predictions by applying quantum mechanics.
The problem with this statement is, that the meaning of "understanding" is unclear here. When I say "I understand that, when I drop an apple it falls on the floor", What exactly do I "understand" here? Does "understanding" mean here, that our brain is trained to predict what would happen?
Actually there is a huge understanding on the mathematical level of quantum mechanics. To apply these equations to what we call "reality" is a problem. But then again, what do we mean exactly with "reality" here?
If some of the effects of quantum mechanics would be visible for us somehow from birth on, would we "understand" quantum mechanics then?
- jeffwass 11y agoFYI, I have a PhD in physics and spent many a late night hour solving theoretical quantum mechanics problems, as well as those applied to statistical mechanics and solid state physics. And yet I'm still inclined to agree with Feynman.
- s-macke 11y agoFor me quantum mechanics is something like a complex cooking receipe. We have equations, we know what we have to put into these equations to solve certain systems. The rest is just an endless variety of coordinate transformations, model assumptions and approximations. And this is the part most physics students struggle.
- jeffwass 11y agoFeynman is not talking about just "turning the crank" as it were, but actual deep intuitive understanding of the 'why'. I agree with you that after you know how to setup the system you want to analyse, turning the mathematical crank can be straightforward and sometimes not so interesting.