Hacker News Reader

What's the point of "understanding” QM intuitively if it brings confusion rather than understanding?

QM can be understood intuitively, the problem is we are still teaching the bullshit 'wave particle duality' when we basically know that fields are what is real.

There's also no such thing as 'observation'. Fields interact by a precise and well-tested mathematical function. That function does have the effect of mutating the state, but why should there be such a thing as pure observation? There's nothing magic about conscious observation.

You literally can't understand something if you are confused by it. Your question makes no sense.

Perhaps the comment was intended to convey the very different potential for intuitive "understanding" between visualisable classical theories and non-visualisable quantum theory.

At a fundamental conceptual level it does not map to anything in our normal experience - attempting to force analogies etc can end up confusing things further.

I agree with your original observation btw, but it's important to recognise the limits we may be bound by in explanation and comparison.

There is a difference between understanding and “understanding” (intuitively, no less!).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com