Oh, those whacky physicists! Who can really expect to entirely understand what they're on about most of the time? Perhaps we should satisfy ourselves with establishing what variety of psylocibin they've been taking.
But if I'm getting this New Scientist story even half right, then one pair of Heisenbergian blackboard-scribblers is suggesting we're affecting the state of the universe by observing it.
Just like the ole 'cat in the box uncertainty principle' (which for me always seemed like much more fun than setting the cat's tail on fire the way I did when I was a kid, and much more explainable to mum as 'a physics experiment mum, honest!')
So taking this nonsense and applying it to some problems more pressing than the ultimate demise of the universe, can we simply solve the climate change crisis by not measuring it any more?
Is the solution to the AIDS epidemic just to stop counting the dying people?
Is the solution to my personal financial situation just to shove all my bills in the bottom drawer without reading them?
...no, wait, I already know the answer to that...
But if I'm getting this New Scientist story even half right, then one pair of Heisenbergian blackboard-scribblers is suggesting we're affecting the state of the universe by observing it.
Just like the ole 'cat in the box uncertainty principle' (which for me always seemed like much more fun than setting the cat's tail on fire the way I did when I was a kid, and much more explainable to mum as 'a physics experiment mum, honest!')
So taking this nonsense and applying it to some problems more pressing than the ultimate demise of the universe, can we simply solve the climate change crisis by not measuring it any more?
Is the solution to the AIDS epidemic just to stop counting the dying people?
Is the solution to my personal financial situation just to shove all my bills in the bottom drawer without reading them?
...no, wait, I already know the answer to that...
clipped from www.newscientist.com
|