Quantum Explanations.

[swestrup]

I thought I would point out that overcoming bias is currently running a series of articles on Quantum Mechanics for the layman. They don't expect you to understand complicated math, but they do expect you to throw away many preconceived notions as what particles are, so its not exactly for the dumb layman. Still, I've been finding it a fascinating read, and it has clarified some of my thinking on these same issues.

Comments

[sps.livejournal.com]

Gack, but he's not a man who uses one sentence when four hundred will do, is he? I found four sentences worth reading in the first post, three in the second, two in the third... and it seems to go on like that.

Or maybe there is content but by now I'm just too frustrated to spot it.

[pythonian.livejournal.com]

On the contrary; since he is trying to quash an entire mindset and replace it with a new one, a mind numbingly meticulous step-by-step approach is required. Each point in each argument must be answered. I've seen many examples of this approach over the years and even if one doesn't agree with the premise or conclusion, at the very least one must conclude that the presentation was thorough.

One can compare it to bashing someone on the head by choosing to land the blows over every square centimetre of the skull just to be sure that the head was well and truly bashed. If that is too violent an image, imagine leading someone by the nose through each of the possible off-shoots of the desired path just to show that: "No you can't hold onto those beliefs anymore."

Don't forget, none of us is representative of the "Layman", certainly not an average one.

[swestrup]

As he has pointed out, the average student is capable of making a single inferential step on their own, no more. So, he has to plot along pointing out the obvious to people like you who CAN see what is implied by what he's already said.

[swestrup]

plot -> plod

[pythonian.livejournal.com]

Exactly. He is "teaching", not merely spewing forth facts. As should be obvious, teaching has its own requirements and pace.

I was trying to make that point but forgot to add that to my comment. Thanks Sti.

[sps.livejournal.com]

But is the layman going to be more well-disposed to this style of presentation? It's true, it does put me in mind of the being hit on the head lessons sketch. "What a stupid concept!"

Seriously, there's a difference between being meticulous and endlessly belabouring the same point. I keep thinking, "let's get to the content, alright?"

[sps.livejournal.com]

Ok, let me explain why it's weird. Most people are, I would think, less intelligent, less insightful, and less well-informed. Yet I find them more interesting, more informative, and easier to follow (the last not because he jumps around, but because he bores me to the point that I cannot stand to read him linearly). This cannot be right!

I'm not usually averse to reading anything with interesting content, so long as the words are strung together competently, whether it's David Hume or Keith Laumer. But not this.

[swestrup]

Ah, if you just find it badly written, then I can't really fault you. He isn't a brilliant writer, and this last serious of essays, although on a topic I really like, are definitely in need of more work. I think he's rushed them, due to lack of time or something.