送交者: 红胡子 于 January 26, 2002 00:25:20:
回答: 胡子老兄好 由 morningstar 于 January 25, 2002 23:07:44:
The basic problem with the 'reasonable understanding' about q-mech is that
it would represent quite absurdities if one is to find parallels in this world.
And, that is the problem - an understanding with contradiction to common sense.
Unacceptable, if not philosophically, at least aesthetically. Plain truth ?
Then why ? This God should be equally attractive and revealing aesthetically,
or is He not ?
About Feymann path integral - I thought that it is an elegant link between
classical and quantum mechanics. It brings in the statistical weight of
classical into quantum mechanics so naturally.
Newton started with the famous question, ended up with his laws. In a way,
the new laws did not answer his question, but translated it into a more
sophisticated new math form. Mankind are now equiped with new understanding of
the nature laws. You and I can, in principle, calculate the orbit of any planet
almost precisely. But, if we revisit his original question, it is metamorphic.
'Why' there exists gravity anyway, if I may ask ? Newton certainly provided
no such answer.
To say this is not to deny the achievements of modern science. 'Why' could
very well be the starting point of a new theory, don't count on it answering that
at the end.