Scientific Questions Thread

[Jia Nanfeng]

And can someone give me simple explanation about Quantum Mechanics in general? I watched and read some popular science book on this but some say that that's unscientific and not what scientists understand about Quantum Mechanics.

Giving a simple explanation of QM is quite the task! Especially since most people will have no formal education in the topic, even here in the West. (And, for the record, Eastern cultures tend to have an easier time understanding QM since they are less likely to be taught in strict Aristotelian logic; that is, “every thing must be true or false”, whereas Eastern philosophies tend to allow for blending of the two.)

If your thesis depends on a proper understanding, I highly suggest reading more books on the topic instead of relying on a Chinese history forum. Not that people here lack knowledge about it (I have some since I have studied causation both in and out of schooling, though only theoretically and not mathematically), but because QM is very difficult to explain simply, and especially because writing a thesis requires proper sourcing.

Recommendations:

One book I personally own is “Quantum Physics: A First Encounter: Interference, Entanglement, and Reality” by Valerio Scarani. Unlike many other books on the topic, he doesn’t get deep into the mathematics; you can get by with just a basic high school level algebraic understanding. He has other good introductory books as well.

If you have a more solid mathematical background, then “Introduction to Quantum Mechanics” by David Griffiths is widely popular, and is used in schools as well. It requires basic calculus, but it isn’t overwhelming like many other books of this level and takes time to thoroughly explain topics.

My personal go-to is purely theoretical, though maybe not good for thesis work: “Quantum Psychology” by Robert Anton Wilson. He’s primarily a satirist writer so he’s a bit off the wall at times but he explains things like non-local causes and “effects without causes” better than most other books I’ve read. It’s an older book though so it doesn’t get into more modern ideas like string theory. I just didn’t want to neglect recommending Wilson when I get the chance because he’s a fav author.

[PyroMystic]

And can someone give me simple explanation about Quantum Mechanics in general? I watched and read some popular science book on this but some say that that's unscientific and not what scientists understand about Quantum Mechanics.

Giving a simple explanation of QM is quite the task! Especially since most people will have no formal education in the topic, even here in the West. (And, for the record, Eastern cultures tend to have an easier time understanding QM since they are less likely to be taught in strict Aristotelian logic; that is, “every thing must be true or false”, whereas Eastern philosophies tend to allow for blending of the two.)

If your thesis depends on a proper understanding, I highly suggest reading more books on the topic instead of relying on a Chinese history forum. Not that people here lack knowledge about it (I have some since I have studied causation both in and out of schooling, though only theoretically and not mathematically), but because QM is very difficult to explain simply, and especially because writing a thesis requires proper sourcing.

Recommendations:

One book I personally own is “Quantum Physics: A First Encounter: Interference, Entanglement, and Reality” by Valerio Scarani. Unlike many other books on the topic, he doesn’t get deep into the mathematics; you can get by with just a basic high school level algebraic understanding. He has other good introductory books as well.

If you have a more solid mathematical background, then “Introduction to Quantum Mechanics” by David Griffiths is widely popular, and is used in schools as well. It requires basic calculus, but it isn’t overwhelming like many other books of this level and takes time to thoroughly explain topics.

My personal go-to is purely theoretical, though maybe not good for thesis work: “Quantum Psychology” by Robert Anton Wilson. He’s primarily a satirist writer so he’s a bit off the wall at times but he explains things like non-local causes and “effects without causes” better than most other books I’ve read. It’s an older book though so it doesn’t get into more modern ideas like string theory. I just didn’t want to neglect recommending Wilson when I get the chance because he’s a fav author.

Thank you for your recommendation! On a side note, though, as you said that you have studied causation both in and out of schooling, though only theoretically and not mathematically, do you study philosophy as well?

[Jia Nanfeng]

Thank you for your recommendation! On a side note, though, as you said that you have studied causation both in and out of schooling, though only theoretically and not mathematically, do you study philosophy as well?

I do! I have some formal education from schooling as well as a general interest in it outside of schooling. I can’t say I’m an expert by any means though, as I tend to get bored quickly and move on to the next thing. When it comes to philosphical topics I’m mainly educated in the mind-body problem and causation, in addition to their relation to theology.

I spent a lot of years in religious debate clubs online and “in real life”. At least 10 years or so. I got a bit burnt out which is why I mostly just study Chinese history these days. Though even in that avenue I tend to read about the mystical side of Chinese history, so there’s some overlap.

Also I lack education in the mathematical side because I hate math so I just don’t apply myself to learning it. As soon as they started putting letters into my number problems, my brain high-tailed.

[Sun Fin]

I used to love maths! Even liked those random letters being inserted in. What I hated was when they introduced tables to everything. I still can't read anything but the most basic of bar tables.

[PyroMystic]

Thank you for your recommendation! On a side note, though, as you said that you have studied causation both in and out of schooling, though only theoretically and not mathematically, do you study philosophy as well?

I do! I have some formal education from schooling as well as a general interest in it outside of schooling. I can’t say I’m an expert by any means though, as I tend to get bored quickly and move on to the next thing. When it comes to philosphical topics I’m mainly educated in the mind-body problem and causation, in addition to their relation to theology.

I spent a lot of years in religious debate clubs online and “in real life”. At least 10 years or so. I got a bit burnt out which is why I mostly just study Chinese history these days. Though even in that avenue I tend to read about the mystical side of Chinese history, so there’s some overlap.

Also I lack education in the mathematical side because I hate math so I just don’t apply myself to learning it. As soon as they started putting letters into my number problems, my brain high-tailed.

Oh my god I can't believe I meet someone who is interested in theology in a forum on Chinese history I loved theology so much that I actually am pursuing a mater degree on theology, but yeah I also got bored pretty fast so I focused on philosophy now philosophy of time and causation is more challenging than theology because I have to self-study. We don't have that many professors trained formally in philosophy but they let me write a thesis on philosophy, which makes me really happy

If you're okay with it, may I know what's your belief (or perhaps lack of)? I'm Christian, Protestantism to be precise. I used to love apologetics (basically you debate those from other beliefs) but I think I'm getting more enemies than friends doing this. Anyway are you more of an analytic of continental philosopher? (Also, could Socrates have been an alligator? )

You read about Chinese mysticism? What books do you read? I'm really interested in that
(tbh I'm interested in a lot of things, but have so little times to actually study all of them)

I actually like math when I was in HS, though I like physics more. Bu now I can't even solve a simple algebraic problem

[Sun Fin]

I also study theology. I'm at a seminary training to be a vicar, but had also studied theology previously at a secular institution. This probably isn't the right thread to discuss this in though.

[Jia Nanfeng]

Oh my god I can't believe I meet someone who is interested in theology in a forum on Chinese history I loved theology so much that I actually am pursuing a mater degree on theology, but yeah I also got bored pretty fast so I focused on philosophy now philosophy of time and causation is more challenging than theology because I have to self-study. We don't have that many professors trained formally in philosophy but they let me write a thesis on philosophy, which makes me really happy

I am mostly self-taught too. My schooling was primarily in the ethics side of philosophy; my studies of causation and mind came afterwards as a hobby, outside of covering some of the basics in school. I definitely dove deeper into philosophy outside of school, but it helped having the foundation from schooling.

If you're okay with it, may I know what's your belief (or perhaps lack of)? I'm Christian, Protestantism to be precise. I used to love apologetics (basically you debate those from other beliefs) but I think I'm getting more enemies than friends doing this. Anyway are you more of an analytic of continental philosopher? (Also, could Socrates have been an alligator? )

I am a deist.
I am very familiar with Christian apologetics because that was one of the areas I debated against on occasion, so I had to learn a lot of it. My main opponents were atheists though, because the clubs I belonged to were more theists vs. atheists than theists vs. theists. I agree that theology debates can often lead to enemies; for many years I'd go to bed with high blood pressure due to the inevitable squabbling. Eventually I just sought people who wanted to discuss theology out of interest or hobby, without the need to "score points" or "win the argument", and it was much more satisfying.

I'm not sure if I'm more of an analytical or continental philosopher; I think it'd depend on the subject. I've never really thought about which branch(es) of philosophy I'd belong too; I just kinda exist with my beliefs.

You read about Chinese mysticism? What books do you read? I'm really interested in that

Too many books to count! I'd suggest reading through the list of my "library" that's linked in my signature. I have a lot of books about daoist mysticism and otherwise supernatural events.

I actually like math when I was in HS, though I like physics more. Bu now I can't even solve a simple algebraic problem

I probably couldn't do a basic algebra problem anymore either. I took a ton of statistics courses in college but I've probably forgotten most of that too. All those years of teachers insisting I'd absolutely use algebra and calculus and statistics in real life were lying.