Thursday, March 5, 2020

The Quantum Mechanical Nature of Life


"Ignorance is Bliss". Really?? The people who advocate this ideology is very selective when it comes choosing what they want to be ignorant about. If one's spouse is secretly admiring some other person, ignorance works. But when you don't know about a condom and get an STD because of unsafe sex, is ignorance really blissful? I am aware we cannot have a blanket rule as "ignorance is bliss" or "knowledge is bliss". Nevertheless, I find this "ignorance is bliss" hurled at me often when I tend to analyse various aspects of life - Philosophical outlook, Relationships, Career etc etc. This got me thinking [I know this goes against "ignorance is bliss" ;-)] whether/how much I subscribe to the ideology in context. 

The reasons behind people advocating ignorance is quite simple. When we start analyzing a lot of things about life and the world around us, it's usually murky waters and can lead to confusions, frustration etc etc. Though I agree with this, I have a slightly different take on this and that is where quantum mechanics comes to picture. But before jumping right into QM, let's begin with Aristotle's physics. Aristotle explained the behavior of an object, such as a rock, in terms of the “essential nature” of that object.  For Aristotle, a non-measurable force existed within an object that compelled it to behave in a certain manner.  A stone, for example, was classified by Aristotle as a heavy object, while fire was defined as a light object.  Since heavy objects, likes stones, tend to fall downwards and light objects, such as fire, tend to move upwards, these behaviors –gravity and levity respectively– were deemed by Aristotle to be part of the essential nature of those objects. I should say this appears lotttt simpler than our current physics. But is it really? The idea of simplicity (parsimony) is slightly different in science than the colloquial use. It's not about how simple it is for a commoner to understand and use but the number of ideas to be used for an explanation should be minimum. Though the ideas of gravity and levity may appear simple to a common man, it is not simpler than Newtonian mechanics (which is complex for a common man) since it uses fewer ideas (only gravity in this case). Extending this logic, quantum mechanics appears lotttt more complex than Newtonian mechanics but it is simpler in the eyes of science since it explains what Newtonian mechanics can explain and more. So I guess, we can see a pattern here. Something that is easy for common use might not be easy in the eyes of science and vice-versa.

Now, this the time to apply the above logic to the whole "Ignorance is Bliss" question. Yes, when we start questioning or understanding something, it appears complex the way QM is complex for a person who starts to study it. It leads to frustrations since many counter-intuitive ideas are embedded in it. However, once a student becomes proficient in QM, it appears differently. The over arching generalization given by QM makes the student to look at the natural world lot more coherently. Similarly, questioning about various aspects of life might be difficult to begin with. But with time, one can notice over arching generalizations which makes the whole life question simpler than before setting out the journey. So yeah. I am not too impressed with ignorance is bliss. I would agree ignorance is better than half-baked knowledge but surely not in front of the power of generalizations.

P S - QM might have given very robust generalization but still it does not have answers to every question of nature. Similarly, though one can find over arching ideas about life, one cannot find all the answers. Guess questions about life goes on as long as life goes on.

No comments:

Post a Comment