![]() So, we then got to work on a joint paper, and they wrote a very long paper, and I cut it down to a very short paper, and they expanded it back to a moderately long paper, and I cut that down to a somewhat less short paper. ![]() And since all joint papers he wrote on the subject were also joint with Gilles, it should be a paper by the three of us. And he was calling to say that we had to write a joint paper on this. And it was Charlie Bennett, who was very excited by what he viewed as the way in which I had modified his work with Brassard. And the next thing I knew, the phone rang early in the morning, waking me up. So, when I wrote a paper pointing out what was wrong with the paper that used Bell’s theorem, I sent a copy of it to Charlie Bennett, who I had known for years, asking whether he could take a quick look at it and tell me whether I’d said anything foolish or stupid. On the contrary, it hides the user from sight But thenomenclature of quantum mechanics is not as helpful as bicycle nomenclature in makingthis explicit. The nature of quantum mechanics, like thatof a bicycle, cannot fully be understood without explicit reference to its user. The very names of these parts of the bicycle makeexplicit reference to the nature of the user. One begins tounderstand a bicycle only when one learns that it is a tool for a creature with two lowerlimbs with feet at the ends to fit on the pedals and two upper limbs ending in handscapable of grasping the handle bars. Without an awareness of its user, a bicycle makes little sense. Given a bicycle, an intelligent extraterrestrial who hadnever encountered a human being would be incapable of grasping the nature of such anartifact. Answer: Because, while it is possible to learn how to use either without knowing whatyou are doing, it is impossible to make sense of either without taking account of whatpeople actually do with them.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |