3 ms·

Recently, I came across the Feynman-Wheeler handshake[1-ish], which lead to the Transactional Interpretation[2] of quantum mechanics, which lead to the Afshar e

Recently, I came across the Feynman-Wheeler handshake[1-ish], which lead to the Transactional Interpretation[2] of quantum mechanics, which lead to the Afshar experiment[3] I've come to conclude that all of these are consistent, but that they are a metaphorical truth, in that you shouldn't interpret them as literal truth. Gun safety advocates teach "All Guns are Loaded", another metaphorical truth. If you behave as if it were true, you will generally live longer, and be safer. The math underlying quantum mechanics has all sorts of non-intuitive interpretations, and is often used as a gateway to woo-woo theories. I'm allergic to woo, and thus treating all of this as a metaphorical truth works best for me. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%E2%80%93Feynman_absorber_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheeler%E2%80%93Feynman_absorb... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_interpretation [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afshar_experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afshar_experiment

didericis 4y ago
This comment will probably give you hives, but the inability to interpret things like QM literally and the inability of the left brain to process things holistically seems relevant to the interpretability problem. See Iain McGilchrist's "The Matter with Things". (I promise it's less woo-woo than it appears)
- mikewarot 4y ago
  I started watching an interview with McGilchrist about the work in question, there was no physics, just a boatload of philosophy. It turns out I don't need physics to be interpretable, just a workable predictive tool.
  - didericis 4y ago
    Fair enough. According to his thesis, the metaphysics/philosophy aspect of this stuff is in a right hemisphere bucket. While there may be reason to meditate on that if you’re a researcher wanting to gain better intuition, if you want to use physics as a tool, the aspects useful to the left hemisphere are all you need/the thesis is irrelevant.
shkkmo 4y ago
You have confused "metaphorical truth" with "heuristic". You can actually verify that a specific gun is not loaded and thus know for certain that not all guns are loaded, this (among several other things) means it really isn't metaphysics at all.. Metaphysics are u
Maursault 4y ago
> I'm allergic to woo Funny that your entire comment is woo.

didericis 4y ago

This comment will probably give you hives, but the inability to interpret things like QM literally and the inability of the left brain to process things holistically seems relevant to the interpretability problem. See Iain McGilchrist's "The Matter with Things". (I promise it's less woo-woo than it appears)

mikewarot 4y ago
I started watching an interview with McGilchrist about the work in question, there was no physics, just a boatload of philosophy. It turns out I don't need physics to be interpretable, just a workable predictive tool.
- didericis 4y ago
  Fair enough. According to his thesis, the metaphysics/philosophy aspect of this stuff is in a right hemisphere bucket. While there may be reason to meditate on that if you’re a researcher wanting to gain better intuition, if you want to use physics as a tool, the aspects useful to the left hemisphere are all you need/the thesis is irrelevant.

shkkmo 4y ago

You have confused "metaphorical truth" with "heuristic". You can actually verify that a specific gun is not loaded and thus know for certain that not all guns are loaded, this (among several other things) means it really isn't metaphysics at all.. Metaphysics are u

Maursault 4y ago

> I'm allergic to woo Funny that your entire comment is woo.