"Now in the further development of science, we want more than just a formula. First we have an observation, then we have numbers that we measure, then we have a law which summarizes all the numbers. But the real glory of science is that we can find a way of thinking such that the law is evident." -Richard Feynman Quantum … Continue reading How light ‘smells’ all its possible paths from source to destination →

  [Note: this is an adapted excerpt from the introductory chapter to a collected volume, Quantum Structural Studies, forthcoming from World Scientific (eds. R.E. Kastner, J. Jeknic-Dugic, and G. Jaroszkiewicz.] The idea that unitary-only dynamics can lead naturally to preferred observables, such that decoherence suffices to explain emergence of classical phenomena (e.g., Zurek 2003) has been shown … Continue reading Decoherence in the Everettian Picture: Why It Fails →

I recently was reminded of the somewhat archaic term 'preternatural' while watching the classic 1963 horror flick "The Haunting." In this amazing film, a scientist interested in occult matters (including, especially, ghosts) decides to investigate Hill House, a nearly century-old mansion notorious for being cursed with untimely deaths and considered as undeniably haunted. He and several … Continue reading The Quantum and the “Preternatural” →

It might be useful to tell students that multiplication can be seen as repeated addition under certain circumstances. But docking a student half credit because he/she used commutativity when that was allegedly not permitted--because not specifically taught yet--is fallacious. You can see why if you simply look at a picture of repeated addition for the … Continue reading On the “repeated addition” problem of Common Core math: ripping the heart out of mathematics and children →

There has been much angst in the cybersphere recently about purported hijackings of solid, rational physical theory in service of 'unprincipled New Age fantasies' about 'Consciousness' being implied by quantum theory. The purpose of this post is to set the record straight about where these allegedly  'Crazy', 'Wrong' ideas came from: distinguished pioneering quantum physicists. … Continue reading Where did this ‘Wrong’ idea of quantum theory implying consciousness come from? Quantum physicists. →

Dear Dr. Harris: At one point in your comments to Dr. Chopra (in "The Future of God" debate), you stated that one will never see a theoretical physicist make a categorical, dogmatic assertion. But I have often seen physicists (and philosophers of physics) do just that. One example is the often-dogmatic assertion that 'physics implies … Continue reading A call for nuance in the ‘science/religion’ discussion–open letter to Dr. Sam Harris →

I recently had a conversation with Deepak Chopra about the ideas in my new book, Understanding Our Unseen Reality: Solving Quantum Riddles. A preview is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLj3hWNGkYQ&feature=youtu.be Full interview is here: https://app.curiositystream.com/#/collection/162/916

The idea of 'weak measurements' has been much discussed recently in the popular science presses as well as in physics journals. This post aims to demystify some of the claims made about quantum systems based on weak measurements. As illustration of the basic idea of weak measurement, consider the following analogy. A quantum shoe factory … Continue reading What are ‘weak measurements’ and what do they tell us about quantum systems? Less than is often claimed. →

A brief introduction to the puzzles of quantum theory and why we should try to understand its message about reality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuUC5aGrKdo

Fred Alan Wolf (aka 'Dr. Quantum') is a best-selling author of philosophically-oriented books on modern physics  for the general reader. He recently offered this review of my new book, Understanding Our Unseen Reality: Solving Quantum Riddles (Imperial College Press): "Ruth Kastner is emerging as one of the latest new interpreters of the mysteries of quantum … Continue reading Dr. Quantum on my new book (http://www.worldscientific.com/worldscibooks/10.1142/p993) →