4 ms·

I think Qualia depends on things that are wholly outside the realm of physical phenomena, in that they come before physics. I don't think the two are really in

• User23 4y ago
  > That said, all the quantum stuff is incredibly beyond me. QED[1] will make it as clear to you as possible. Feynman conceived it as, paraphrasing, "explaining quantum physics to a housewife" which to our ear sounds vaguely offensive, but charitably construed for the time in which he said it means making it accessible to someone who has a lot of other responsibilities and doesn't have a ton of time to dedicate to learning advanced physics. It's a really neat book in that it explains the principles pretty much perfectly, while eliding the advanced techniques needed for practical computation of predictions. The analogy given is that you could teach someone to do calculus with nothing more than jars of rocks. It wouldn't be efficient, but it would be correct. "Rock" incidentally, is the Latin root for calculus. If you find the role of the complex numbers as fascinating as I did, then Visual Complex Analysis[2] is another great read. It's considerably more challenging than QED, but on the other hand it clarified a bunch of things for me that my high school and college mathematics courses failed to explain and just presented as givens. [1] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/202469.Quantum_Electrodynamics https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/202469.Quantum_Electrody... [2] https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/149800.Visual_Complex_Analysis https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/149800.Visual_Complex...