Quantum-munity Comments

Physics, altered expectations, and an actually coherent explanation of the double-slit experiment.

This was the Substack image generator’s image of “quantum physics.” I like it.

So, it’s been a long month.

The school year’s wrapping up, our apartment is hot as Hell. It’s eight o’clock at night, and of course, I’ve waited until the last possible second to put together a Community Comments post.

Naturally, I decided to tackle some light, breezy subject matter: quantum physics.

I wrote about the subject a couple weeks ago:

Quantum Mechanics and the NYC Subway

If you haven’t read that post, go there first. It’s one of my better ones.

Unfortunately, when writing it, I didn’t actually know anything about quantum mechanics, so I tackled the subject with humor rather than precision.

Some of you matched this energy, and with fantastic results.

This one from JCofMars made me laugh:

Douglas McClenaghan had a fun idea (which is also very timely, given our new Thinking Man Book Club pick.

And I think Jim in Alaska is onto something here (although I don’t think this and the physics explanation are mutually exclusive):

In case you were looking for a practical explanation for this train stuff, Michael Vigne and I came up with a practical answer (and had a great time doing so).

I wrote the post in a genuine attempt to learn some more physics, though, and luckily, an actual physicist weighed in. He promised a detailed report on the post, which I was very excited about.

And he delivered! Ian Simbotin, you’re the best. First things first, I learned that the videos I linked to were actually abysmal:

First, he shared a video, which I really enjoyed watching and which really clarified the particle/wave distinction that I half-described in my post.

Here’s the video, since obviously the link in that screenshot doesn’t work.

If you followed that and would like to go deeper, he provided some more links below.

https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/

https://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/III_01.html

Thank you so much, Ian. I continued my deep-dive today with the resources you provided, and I learned a lot (although I can’t say I fully understood the Feynman Lectures).

I highly recommend that you read through all these. Ian provides a better picture of the subject than I ever could.

I’m still waiting for my grade, although after seeing how much I didn’t know, I can’t say I have high hopes.

Now, for the laymen, let’s dial it back. Rat, as usual, asked the real questions:

And Geary Johansen blew me away with his thoughts:

On the subject of the metaphysical, this comment from The Starfire Codes really stuck with me:

I haven’t been able to stop thinking about this expectation engine idea. I’ve been playing around with it nonstop, and I’ve probably thought about it several times a day since this comment.

Demi wrote a great post where she talks about this. You can read it here:

Is Your Support Network Really A Barbed Wire Fence?

Regarding the train time thing, I haven’t gotten my superpowers yet (I think the cloud of negativity this entire city has built up in their heads surrounding the MTA is strong enough to thwart even my best efforts), but I have managed to consistently shave the wait time down from nine minutes to seven, and I’d call that progress!

In all seriousness, though, this may have actually changed my life. I responded to Demi’s post with this anecdote:

This was an enlightening one. Thank you all for reading and for your amazing comments. I read and appreciate them all (or at least I try to), and I’m sorry if yours was not listed here.

Constantly learning from you all is my favorite thing about writing this platform. I am so grateful to all of you!

Thank you for reading. If you enjoy these posts and would like to support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

If you’re feeling generous, you can even buy me a coffee (or a day’s subway fare).