There’s an old joke about quantum mechanics professors starting their first lecture with something along the lines of “right now, some of you probably understand quantum mechanics. By the end of the semester, if I did my job right, none of us will understand it.”
You both understand and don’t understand quantum mechanics at the same time… It’s that simple, that is until such a point at which becomes known as to whether or not you understand or don’t understand quantum physics and then some kind of quantum tunnel collapses?
A lot of us understand it as dice rolls based on shit we can’t account for, more or less. Be a bit easier when someone finds out vacuum energy causes unstable isotopes to decay but I’m not nearly that smart and I’m also digressing. Kids in 300 years acting like it’s common sense lol
I like watching it in action. I don’t know what the hell is going on, but it gives me a strange kind of peace, and if you stare at it long enough, you trick yourself into thinking that it makes some kind of sense.
You know what, i keep thinking that maybe, our universe is the only universe that actually functions. Like, if the universe was in some different way, it either wouldn’t work and we would therefore not exist to observe it, or it would be equivalent to this universe, i.e. maybe not exactly equal, but similar in some way, sothat we could form abstractions and arrive at the same universal laws that we have today. Including quantum mechanics.
I can tell a piece of software to do the maths for ms.
Sometimes the results appear to work with reality.
People complain about LLMs hallucinating, but they have no idea of how many assumptions and just plain “everybody does it this way, I guess it works” are there in scientific research.
I didn’t notice your critique on the outcome of results, but how they were achieved. LLM’s hallucinating are making computers make ”human errors”, which makes them less deterministic, the key reason I prefer doing some things on a computer.
The different domain though. LLM hallucinations may lead to catastrophe, while assuming infinite mass of an electron in absence of electromagnetic field is neat
I can perfectly fine do the calculations; That’s what “understanding” is, in my opinion. Feynman might be hitting on some metaphysical concept, but then again, what is that metaphysical concept, is it any different from pseudoscience, and do we really need it?
I’ve read this like ten times and I think the joke might be that quantum mechanics are difficult to explain to everyone, of which women are obviously a subset. But maybe I’m doling out too much credit lol
The joke is that quantum mechanics are difficult to understand, so the commenter doubts their ability to properly explain it (to women). The replier assumed it was a dig at women’s intelligence, not a reflection of the original commenter’s intelligence and ability to explain.
I.e. a stupid person would have difficulty explaining anything to women.
To be fair, the original question did not clearly state it needed to be easy to explain to men. The only requirement was to be difficult to explain to women. So, technically, this answers the question as written.
piefed.zeromedia.vip
fossilesque
Share on Mastodon
Share on Reddit
Share on WhatsApp
It’s hard to explain quantum mechanics when you don’t understand them.
It’s hard to explain quantum mechanics even when you understand them.
It’s a superposition of knowledge and ignorance.
The more you know the less you know
Congratulations, you’ve successfully explained quantum mechanics.
Sometimes I get the sense that I have a clear picture of quantum mechanics. But when I look closer, it gets all blurry.
This isn’t even a joke, it’s literally true in quantum mechanics.
Thank you for explaining the joke, I now know less.
You know nothing, but you know precisely about what you know nothing.
The more you know of one thing the less you know of the other*
This is true about everything though.
Damn Heisenberg
There’s an old joke about quantum mechanics professors starting their first lecture with something along the lines of “right now, some of you probably understand quantum mechanics. By the end of the semester, if I did my job right, none of us will understand it.”
If they’re lucky they might understand kubernetes though.
Or as the professionals call it, k8s
Iirc, it’s a youtube video of an actual class
Edit: https://youtube.com/shorts/X4pehLRhFhI
I thought that was like its thing. It doesn’t really make sense.
I understand them! They perform oil changes on the quantum
They’re so good they fix your car on the quantum level!
They both do and don’t fix your car, you just don’t know until you’ve paid them. No refunds!
Thats the joke!
That was the point, right?
It’s hard to explain jokes when you don’t understand them.
No one understands quantum mechanics
You both understand and don’t understand quantum mechanics at the same time… It’s that simple, that is until such a point at which becomes known as to whether or not you understand or don’t understand quantum physics and then some kind of quantum tunnel collapses?
No habla English
The waves of this comment collapsed into photons entering my eyes showing me a joke about superposition once I observed it.
¿Que paso?
You should Hadamard again to reverse the superposition.
Vos me queres decir que entender mecanica cuantica es como entender el final de evangelion?
Whoa. Blakeception
Then why do I have anti- matter in my trunk?
A lot of us understand it as dice rolls based on shit we can’t account for, more or less. Be a bit easier when someone finds out vacuum energy causes unstable isotopes to decay but I’m not nearly that smart and I’m also digressing. Kids in 300 years acting like it’s common sense lol
Quite a few people understand quantum mechanics, but they can’t explain it to you if you don’t understand the maths
There’s no good way of putting quantum into words, all of the descriptions are wrong in more or less subtle ways
Both quotes attributed to Richard Feynman.
I can do (some of) the maths, but I definitely can’t explain why any of it is like that, or how it works.
We all end up looking at cats in boxes pictures on the internet whenever we start to try to understand oh wow this cat is funny.
I like watching it in action. I don’t know what the hell is going on, but it gives me a strange kind of peace, and if you stare at it long enough, you trick yourself into thinking that it makes some kind of sense.
You know what, i keep thinking that maybe, our universe is the only universe that actually functions. Like, if the universe was in some different way, it either wouldn’t work and we would therefore not exist to observe it, or it would be equivalent to this universe, i.e. maybe not exactly equal, but similar in some way, sothat we could form abstractions and arrive at the same universal laws that we have today. Including quantum mechanics.
I can tell a piece of software to do the maths for ms. Sometimes the results appear to work with reality.
People complain about LLMs hallucinating, but they have no idea of how many assumptions and just plain “everybody does it this way, I guess it works” are there in scientific research.
It’s called the heuristic method and those doing it know the limitations. Whereas LLMs will just confidently put out garbage claiming it true.
Scientific calculations - and other approaches as well - put out garbage all the time, that is the main point of what I said above.
Some limitations are known, just like it is known that LLMs have the limitation of hallucinating.
I didn’t notice your critique on the outcome of results, but how they were achieved. LLM’s hallucinating are making computers make ”human errors”, which makes them less deterministic, the key reason I prefer doing some things on a computer.
Which is ironic because everyone has, at least once, been asked “but how does it work?” and have answered “dunno, but it does”
The different domain though. LLM hallucinations may lead to catastrophe, while assuming infinite mass of an electron in absence of electromagnetic field is neat
Calculations will happily tell you that an acutely toxic drug is the best way to cure cancer.
The reason why that does not lead to catastrophe is that there are many checks and safety nets in place in order not to blindly trust any result.
The exact same approach can be applied to an LLM.
What does “understanding” mean in this context?
I can perfectly fine do the calculations; That’s what “understanding” is, in my opinion. Feynman might be hitting on some metaphysical concept, but then again, what is that metaphysical concept, is it any different from pseudoscience, and do we really need it?
Plain stupid
We’ve learned rather a lot since then.
imagine calling one of the greatest science educators of the modern era “plain stupid”
Cropped so I get the authentic glaucoma experience.
A delightful character arc.
is it an arc or was the first response a rage-bait-y ‘quantum mechanics are difficult to explain regardless of gender’
Yes
My grandfather didn’t die in Korea so that people could fight online like this.
Oh same, my grandpa didn’t die in Korea either. Twins!
That wasn’t a fight.
I was just referring to an old internet joke that was in the same vein as this post.
I was expecting a similar response to OP’s. Especially for him.
This is peak my phone is fighting for its life energy 😂
I pretty sure magic is involved
I’ve read this like ten times and I think the joke might be that quantum mechanics are difficult to explain to everyone, of which women are obviously a subset. But maybe I’m doling out too much credit lol
The joke is that quantum mechanics are difficult to understand, so the commenter doubts their ability to properly explain it (to women). The replier assumed it was a dig at women’s intelligence, not a reflection of the original commenter’s intelligence and ability to explain.
I.e. a stupid person would have difficulty explaining anything to women.
To be fair, the original question did not clearly state it needed to be easy to explain to men. The only requirement was to be difficult to explain to women. So, technically, this answers the question as written.
And we all know that technically correct is the best kind of correct.
No thats definitely the joke.
Redditor failed the litmus test for misandrists
Fuck Reddit and Fuck Spez.
We know, but it’s getting a bit cringe now
Fuck Reddit and Fuck Spez.
Nah.
good bot
Such a warrior!
Anyone else bored as fuck, and wish someone would post another Misoginyst/Misandrist post, so we can read people getting upset?
I’m actually kind of addicted to watching the hate now. I’m not even Misoginyst/Misandrist myself.
95% of those are just ai generated rage-bait, so just ask ChatGPT to make one for you and you’ll get the same experience.
Beep
its because we’re living in a simulation written by chatgpt
You, maybe. I’m living in a simulation written by Claude. Where my Anthroposse at?!?
Sorry, best I can do is this Anthrobussy.
plenty of that on e621
I’m living my best life in a simulation written by a sentient wheel of cheese.
I hear it’s a grating lifestyle.
Sheogorath approves.
Be ye not afraid 😳
You fools! We’ve all been living in a simulation written by Bonsai Buddy!!
Miss that guy. I don’t mind that he was stealing my data, he was my friend, and my dad called him spyware and deleted him :’(
(For those who didn’t get it, this comment is
hopefullyprobably referring to the Bonzi Buddy malware, which had a purple monkey mascot.)I think the saddest thing is that otherwise reasonable people spend more than a millisecond thinking about whether or not we live in a simulation.
Nah, it’s just Brandon Sanderson. Slightly different.
*James Patterson
i never actually read james patterson. is it as dreck as i’m assuming it is?
sanderson has some good stuff. i was impressed with tress of the emerald sea. way of kings was good, just…..too much
Deleted by author
JesseWhatTheFuckAreYouTalkingAbout.jpg