tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-50988484274709599722019-04-03T20:10:40.207-05:00Quantum ParadoxesPhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-70118328841166270082017-03-03T19:05:00.001-06:002017-03-03T19:05:38.988-06:00Quantum MetaphysicsWhat's really behind all the strange phenomena and obtuse mathematics found in quantum mechanics?<br><br>Jim and Randy discussed this before the <a href = http://paradoxes-physicsfm.blogspot.com/2015/08/how-can-you-go-from-probabilistic.html>last published episode</a> of PhysicsFM as a warm up after a hiatus and as a preview for episode 9: Quantum Cats. Discussing the same ideas in general with reference to a chapter of <I>Quantum Mechanics and the Particles of Nature</i> by Anthony Sudbury, which conveniently discussed four aspects of quantum mechanics that need interpreting and nine ways of interpreting them, some more objective than others.<bR><br>Almost every belief about quantum mechanics can be described in one of these interpretations, and each of these interpretations have some adherents. And each of them, at some level are wrong. <br><br> <iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/8369942?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe><br><br> Also, don't forget to check out <a href = http://physicsfm-frontiers.blogspot.com/>Physics Frontiers</a>, where Randy and Jim discuss a different subject in each episode.PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-74617797251979259212016-10-31T22:21:00.002-05:002016-10-31T22:21:13.368-05:00Physics FrontiersRandy and I have started up a companion podcast, <a href = http://physicsfm-frontiers.blogspot.com/>Physics Frontiers</a>, with shorter discussions of topics in physics. <a href = http://physicsfm-frontiers.blogspot.com/>Check it out!</a> <iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/8242815?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe> Show notes at <a href = http://physicsfm-frontiers.blogspot.com/2016/10/g4v-gravitational-4-vector-formulation.html>the Physics Frontiers</a> website.PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-70305675785271667402015-08-05T17:51:00.001-05:002017-11-20T12:22:15.998-06:00Quantum Cats<br />How can you go from a probabilistic description of a phenomenon to a physical measurement?<br /><br />Contrary to classical probability and statistical mechanics, where we have a separation between the governing physics of a situation (mechanical laws) and our knowledge of it (thermodynamics), in quantum mechanics the governing physics is in some way probabilistic in nature.&nbsp; This means that we cannot interpret probability in the same way that we do in macroscopic phenomena.&nbsp; The Schroedinger's Cat Paradox shows us that we need to have an interpretation of the transition from the probabilistic regime of theory to the material regime of reality to understand what the wave function -- the complete description of a quantum system -- means<br /><br />The thing is: there is no adequate interpretation of the wave function.<br /><br />In this episode, we talk about Aharonov and Rohrlich's Quantum Paradoxes, chapter 9: "Quantum Cats:"<br /><br /><center><br /><iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7696096?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe></center><br /><br />We're reading the book <a href = http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/3527403914/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&amp;camp=1789&amp;creative=390957&amp;creativeASIN=3527403914&amp;linkCode=as2&amp;tag=physandengibo-20&amp;linkId=KF5QHFGMOIRY5MZU">Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements.PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-33418383150608751922015-08-04T18:40:00.002-05:002015-08-04T18:47:32.342-05:00Schrodinger's CatI've put together a video describing Schrodinger's cat and explaining why its important to have an interpretation of quantum mechanics. It doesn't give any answers, just explains why the question is so important. We overview some of the answers in the next podcast, which I will hopefully get up tomorrow (I'm putting in the breaks right now. I need to record the intro and upload it, so it's pretty likely).<br /><br />Plus, I drew the pictures.<br /><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VDJ1AsscO94" width="560"></iframe><br />PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-54739509803181497682015-07-06T18:38:00.001-05:002017-08-06T18:43:50.390-05:00VideosI've got the first of the explanatory videos up. Randy and I have talked about putting up videos to help explain what is going on in the experiments for almost a year now. It can be really hard for someone to visualize what's happening in the experiments for the paradoxes just from our description. I've even found that in writing descriptions: the more precise someone describes something, the harder it is for someone else to understand it.<br><br>That's just not how we talk.<br><br>Unfortunately, the vaguer the description the more easily the listener misconstrues what is being said. And it turns out it's not an easy needle to thread: it takes many years for someone to be able to reliably read a geometrical description of a problem without getting confused.<br><br>But never fear, video is here! I can draw out what I want to talk about for you, as I have in this video.<br><br> <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MFA_FAKlaI4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-33972145783372940322015-07-02T17:48:00.001-05:002017-11-20T12:24:46.660-06:00Measurement and Compensation Unfortunately, I deleted much of the intro. I'll fix it later. <br><Br> e-mail me if this is still here after September. Thanks! <Br><br> In this episode, we talk about Aharonov and Rohrlich's Quantum Paradoxes, chapter 8: "Measurement and Compensation":<br /><br /><center><iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7655341?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe></center><br /><br />Please comment on our <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/">subreddit</a>! It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br /><br />We're reading <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/3527403914/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=3527403914&linkCode=as2&tag=physandengibo-20&linkId=KF5QHFGMOIRY5MZU">Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements.PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-90349445765289730752015-06-22T18:36:00.002-05:002015-06-22T18:36:16.581-05:00Early Edition Is Up!I finally got Show 8 mostly edited and uploaded to Patreon. As per my promise there, I won't publish it here for a day or two, but I've got both of those working. Last month I tried to put up the special discussion we had on quantum interpretations and had a lot of problems for no known reason. Now that I've got that working, I'll try putting that up again in about two weeks. Show 8 is the first show that goes up early, so I wanted to inform people that I'd made the Patreon feed work the way it's supposed to. This is the last time I'll post about Patreon here unless there is some important change.PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-9949400467077221842015-04-22T17:50:00.001-05:002017-11-20T11:56:11.624-06:00Quantum MeasurementsHow can you measure the velocity? <br><br> Randy and Jim discuss how difficult it is to measure quantities like velocity in quantum mechanics. In doing so they discuss von Neumann's five-requirement theory of quantum measurement and a mathematical treatment of the measuring process that involves a quantum mechanical treatment of the measuring device and the interaction between it and the system under measurement. In this episode, we talk about Aharonov and Rohrlich's Quantum Paradoxes, chapter 7: "Quantum Measurement."<br><br> <br><br><center> <iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7556952?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe> <br><br></center> Please comment on our <a href = http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/>subreddit!</a> It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br><br> We're reading <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements. PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-16479272536900612292015-04-16T14:50:00.001-05:002015-04-16T14:50:59.157-05:00New Things to Play WithAlright!<br><br> Sorry about the tardiness of the last post. I was in a rush to upload the previous one before Easter break, and I found out that I screwed up the upload somehow and so I couldn't get your post up while I was away. Then, after I got back to NOLA, I had a lot of other things to do for the end of the semester and so even though I got the podcast uploaded to <a href = https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChuNchecbn2vOzbtbQG1uYg>Podomatic</a>, I didn't get any blogging stuff done.<br><br> But today, I got two things up and running. The first is our <a href = https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChuNchecbn2vOzbtbQG1uYg>YouTube</a> page, which will feature supplementary videos about the things we're discussing. I'll get that in better order over the summer.<br><br> The second is our <a href = https://www.patreon.com/PhysicsFM>Patreon</a> account, which has been waiting for a video to explain what the whole Patreon thing is. So now you have the option to help us out directly if you want to.PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-29779683312341630342015-04-16T09:05:00.002-05:002017-11-20T11:49:07.413-06:00Nonlocality and CausalityWhat's the best way to describe a physical system? <br><br> Jim and Randy discuss Aharonov and Rohrlich's proposal to use two axioms based upon the behavior of quantum mechanical particles that they discussed in the previous episodes: <DD> (1) Interactions between quantum mechanical particles are nonlocal. </dd><dd> (2) Interactions between quantum mechanical particles are causal. </dd> This is in contrast to the more mathematical Dirac-von Neumann axioms: <dd> (1) The observables of a quantum system are defined to be the self-adjoint operators that operate of state defined in a Hilbert space.</dd><dd> (2) A state of the system is a set of probability amplitudes for results of orthogonal* experiments that define the Hilbert space. </dd><dd> (3) The expectation value of an observable of a system is the average of the values of each observable weighted by the square of the probability amplitudes of the system's state. </dd> Aharanov and Rohrlich give us five distinct paradoxes that illustrate how to use nonlocality and causality to make predictions about the behavior of a system and the necessity for another modular variable: the modular energy. In this episode, we talk about Aharonov and Rohrlich's Quantum Paradoxes, chapter 6: "Nonlocality and Causality."<br><br> <br><br><center> <iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7515416?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe> <br><br></center> Please comment on our <a href = http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/>subreddit!</a> It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br><br> We're reading <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements. * A state that is orthogonal is PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-79052165285720444762015-02-25T15:32:00.001-06:002017-11-20T11:46:25.324-06:00Modular VariablesThe heavy hitting starts this month with the introduction of modular variables. <br><br> Randy and Jim wrap their heads around a diffraction paradox invented by Aharonov to help us understand why it is that Einstein's paradoxes, which were about the behavior of small, quantum particles, were solved by Bohr using the uncertainty principle <I>on the apparatus</I> instead of the particle itself. He uses a diffraction grating instead of a double slit experiment because an effectively infinite number of repeating openings in a regular array is easier to analyze than a small number of openings. In doing this, Aharovov formulates what he calls the "complete uncertainty principle" which produces a relatively straightforward physical reason for the uncertainty principle -- although it requires some very specialized mathematics. Keep your eyes on the physics because the math will get you if you don't watch out<br><br>. In this episode, we talk about Aharonov and Rohrlich's Quantum Paradoxes, chapter 5: "Modular Variables".<br><br> <br><br><center> <iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7465078?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe> <br><br></center> Please comment on our <a href = http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/>subreddit!</a> It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br><br> We're reading <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements. PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-44252869963646268642015-01-27T10:42:00.000-06:002018-05-31T20:18:25.326-05:00Phases and GaugesHow can a quantity that has no effect on a classical object change the dynamics of a quantum particle? <br><br> That's what Randy and Jim explore as we discuss two paradoxes that try to explain this. Both paradoxes are similar in nature in that they involve a double slit experiment and a measurement that should allow the experimenter to determine which slit the electron goes through and without disturbing the electron. The first of these uses a charged capacitor with movable plates situated directly behind the screen in which the slits are cut and in the gap behind the slits, and whose capacitance will differ depending upon the path the electron takes. The second has a charged, cylindrical capacitor situated within the screen that will rotate in different directions depending upon the slit the electron passes through. In both situations, the electron feels no net force from the the charged capacitor and so should not react to it. <br><br> In this episode, we talk about Aharonov and Rohrlich's <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a>, chapter 4: "Phases and Gauges". Additional topics we discuss are the Aharonov-Bohm effect, the vector potential.<br><br> <br><br><center><iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7422692?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe><br><br></center> Please comment on our <a href = http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/>subreddit!</a> It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br><br> We're reading <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations of quantum mechanics are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements. <br><br>PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-86772120424598626292014-12-22T18:39:00.000-06:002017-11-20T11:25:05.382-06:00Is Quantum Theory Complete?Can quantum theory as currently formulated be all there is to the theory? <br><br> That was Einstein's greatest doubt, and many people doubt it today. Quantum theory seems to offer us probabilities for the results of well constructed experiments. But it does not offer us insight of the internal workings of those experiments. Can that really be all we can know about the quantum world? <br><br> That's what Randy and Jim discuss in this episode while talking about Aharonov and Rohrlich's <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a>, chapter 3: "Is Quantum Theory Complete?"<br><br> Einstein's Clock in a Box Paradox (last episode) failed to prove that quantum theory was inconsistent -- that the postulates of quantum theory have some contradictory implications. So, he turned to proving that they were incomplete: additional postulates were required to provide a full understanding of the physics of the theory (similar the necessity of Euclid's fifth postulate in geometry). So he and two others invented the Einstein-Poldosky-Rosen Paradox (this episode), which many years later would be formalized as Bell's Theorem and then shown to be consistent with measurements in the Aspect experiment.<br><br> Also discussed in this episode: quantum entanglement and the block universe.<br><br> <br><br><center> <iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7377552?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe> <br><br></center> Please comment on our <a href = http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/>subreddit!</a> It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br><br> We're reading <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements. <br><br> A popular, and short, introduction to quantum mechanics that includes a lot of the topics in the first half of this books is Rae's <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM2-1>Quantum Physics</a>. If the equations in Quantum Paradoxes get you down, this might perk you up. <br><br> Two other books that were mentioned in this podcast were: <br><br> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521523389/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0521523389&linkCode=as2&tag=physandengibo-20&linkId=3EJNAOT5ITOGU3KV">Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics: Collected Papers on Quantum Philosophy</a><img src="https://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=physandengibo-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0521523389" width="1" height="1" border="0" alt="" style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;">: This is a collection Bell's papers that includes his formulation of the EPR in a way that there is a measurable difference between classical and quantum results. <br><br> <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0486659690/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0486659690&linkCode=as2&tag=physandengibo-20&linkId=L72IIUF46IHMYN2E">Quantum Theory (Dover Books on Physics)</a><img src="https://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?t=physandengibo-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0486659690" width="1" height="1" border="0" alt="" style="border:none !important; margin:0px !important;">: David Bohm's classic text on quantum mechanics. In Chapter 14, he formulates the EPR paradox mathematically using electron spin and Stern-Gerlach devices. <br><br> PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-43423336770995388962014-11-21T12:20:00.000-06:002017-11-20T11:10:59.980-06:00How to Weigh a Quantum: Randy and Jim talk about consistencyWhy do we need quantum mechanics? <br><br> Is the way that physicists formulate quantum mechanics viable?<br><br> That's what Randy and Jim answer in this episode, talking about Aharonov and Rohrlich's <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a>. Including:<br><br> (1) Mathematical Consistency:<br><br> A set of mathematical postulates is consistent if they don't have contradictory implications.<br><br> (2) Black Body Radiation:<br><br> A black body is a hot object, like a kiln. Being hot, the cavity of the kiln has a large thermal energy. It transfers some of that energy to the electromagnetic field -- it glows.<br><br> In 1899, Max Planck proposed that the thermal energy from the black body can only transfer to the electromagnetic field in discrete chunks, called quanta.<br><br> (3) The Compton Effect <br><br>The Compton effect is one where a photon (a massless quantum particle of light) strikes and electron, but momentum is transferred from the photon to the electron -- meaning the massless photon has momentum to transfer.<br><br> (4) Uncertainty Relationships<br><br> In quantum mechanics, there are pairs of variables called conjugate variables that cannot be both simultaneously and and precisely measured together.<br><br> This is discussed in terms of the light from a microscope.<br><br> (5) Single Slit Diffraction<br><br> Light diffracts in a single slit experiment, not just a double slit like we talked about last time.<br><br> (6) The Clock in the Box Paradox<br><br> Einstein's last attempt to prove that the mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics is inconsistent. <br><br>Thanks to Neal Tircuit for our new theme music! <br><br><center> Please comment on our <a href = http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/>subreddit!</a> It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br><br><br> <iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7339434?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe> <br><br></center> We're reading <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1>Quantum Paradoxes</a> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is a technical book that is making an argument for a specific interpretation of quantum theory. The first half of the book uses paradoxes to explore the meaning of quantum theory and describe its mathematics, then after interpretations are discussed in the middle chapter, an interpretation of quantum mechanics is explored with paradoxes based on weak quantum measurements. <br><br> A popular, and short, introduction to quantum mechanics that includes a lot of the topics in the first half of this books is Rae's <a href = http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM2-1>Quantum Physics</a>. If the equations in Quantum Paradoxes get you down, this might perk you up. PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5098848427470959972.post-872577422512917062014-10-21T15:35:00.001-05:002017-11-20T11:09:43.737-06:00The Uses of Paradox: Randy and Jim talk about Quantum Paradoxes, Chapter 1What good do paradoxes do?<br /><br />Randy and Jim discuss paradoxes, their use in physics, quantum mechanics, and the twin paradox, all as an introduction to <i>Quantum Paradoxes</i> by Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich. This is the first of 18 planned podcasts on this book, one per chapter.<br /><br /><center> Please comment on our <a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/physicsFM/">subreddit!</a> It will help us respond to what you're saying if we can collect all the comments in the same place. <br /> <br /><iframe src='https://podomatic.com/embed/html5/episode/7291742?autoplay=false' height='208' width='504'frameborder='0' marginheight='0' marginwidth='0' scrolling='no' allowfullscreen></iframe></center><br /><br />Books (probably) mentioned in this episode (Amazon links):<br /><br /><a href="http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM1">Quantum Paradoxes: Quantum Theory for the Perplexed</a>, Yakir Aharonov and Daniel Rohrlich -- The book we're discussing. <br /><br /><a href="http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM8">Paradoxes in Probability Theory</a>, William Eckhardt. A fun little book that helps guide you to a better understanding of probabilistic concepts using paradoxes. What I was reading just before recording the first episode.<br /><br /><a href="http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM2">Paradoxes</a>, R.M. Sainsbury -- A very interesting book on paradoxes in general. It's had many editions, so I assume it's used in classes somewhere.<br /><br /><a href="http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM3">Zeno's Paradoxes</a>, Wesley C. Salmon, Ed. -- A collection of articles on the meaning of Zeno's Paradoxes.<br /><br /><a href="http://bit.ly/PhysicsFM4">Potential Theory</a>, Oliver D. Kellogg -- Classic book on potential theory (discussion deleted, but you should know about it, anyway.)<br /><br /><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521277655/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0521277655&linkCode=as2&tag=physandengibo-20&linkId=ZK7QXMFEPSHL6UVX">Quantum Mechanics and the Particles of Nature: An Outline for Mathematicians</a>, Anthony Sudbury -- Absolutely awesome book on quantum mechanics; at least I thought so when I first read it twenty years ago. Very readable textbook.<br /><br /><a href="http://bit.ly/PhysicFM6">Introduction to Quantum Mechanics</a>, John S. Townsend -- The current edition of the book I used as an undergraduate. I find the approach taken here to be well grounded and intuitive.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0131118927/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0131118927&linkCode=as2&tag=physandengibo-20&linkId=U5C5ZYXLJY5GCCGZ">Introduction to Quantum Mechanics</a>, David J. Griffiths -- A more commonly used quantum mechanics textbook; we use it at Xavier (but I don't teach QM).<br /><br /><br />PhysicsFMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13134018651176248475noreply@blogger.com0