Hilariously, a lot of the now-popular “explanations” (such as some comic I saw recently) for quantum phenomena that purport to better clarify what’s really going on at that level are little better than the bad explanations they propose to replace.

Supplanting vernacular explanations with semi-mathemetical formalism doesn’t elucidate anything any more clearly, it’s just more descriptive of the math itself.

The events aren’t the math; the map is not the territory. Call it “superposition” or a “unit vector in two-dimensional Hilbert space,” the underlying phenomena are not clarified at all. Just as Feynman understood that knowing as a bit of trivia such as the name of a bird told you very little about it*, knowing the right words to say in the direction of a quantum event really helps you very little.

Unfortunately, all we really know to say are the right words, or the right formulae. In quantumland, you just accept, not understand. If you think you understand, that’s a sure sign you do not. What’s really going on might be a meaningless question or it might be incomprehensible. No one knows, really. But the math is not the event. And neither are the words.

Also note that the interpretation of the QM in the comic isn’t the only one accepted by even mainstream scientists (much less loons).

Anyway, scientists tend to mistake the math for the event — understandable, really, as math is their tool.

I approach things from a more philosophical perspective and recognize that a drawing on the wall is not really a cat, and ceci n’est pas une pipe. The math and the words are not the world and never will be.

*Though today, knowing that name is more important and more helpful since so much more of our brains are outsourced now compared to 1950.