I said what I meant.
Moore describes Schrödinger having a 'Lolita complex'. He quotes from Schrödinger's diary from the time where he said that "men of strong, genuine intellectuality are immensely attracted only by women who, forming the very beginning of the intellectual series, are as nearly connected to the preferred springs of nature as they".
Including the follow up of someone questioning "devout" and getting that quote in response.
Still my first time seeing it. And as a physicist who wants to strive to improve my field we should know these things.
yuck. he apparently groomed a 14yo he was tutoring and eventually got her pregnant, and later preyed on a 12yo (per Wikipedia.)
never meet your heroes.
eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeshh
Commas cost extra, so it was commonplace to leave them out.
Are you perhaps thinking of someone else? As far as I'm aware, Schrödinger is only well known for work in particle physics, quantum mechanics, and related physics fields.
No, I think I am. I have somehow confused Schrödinger for Freud.
Wow. Brains be dumb sometimes.
oh its supposed to be interpreted two ways, I see thank you
I know the 'sch' can be a difficult phoneme for the Americans, but this variety is special
Freud was definitely influential, and definitely full of shit, so that tracks. Psychoanalysis is completely empirical, written as an unattackable dogma rather than science, and has been proven without any beneficial effect as a treatment on most psychological troubles. But because Freud was so influential, especially in France, almost all French psych universities are teaching his bullshit first and almost exclusively.
Also, the amount of shit he's written leads to modern day psychoanalysts with absolute horrors of diagnoses like "it's that kid's mother's fault that they have autism, because she loves them wrong".
I'm starting to think the pigeon wasn't so bad
Don't forget his contribution to paedomechanics.
Yes, he was an Epsteinite, but his point was generally correct. Einstein, Schrödinger, and Bell all recognized that the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics makes no sense because it postulates a transition from quantum to classical with no explanation of how this actually occurs. They would not have liked Many Worlds either because it does not actually get rid of the transition, it just claims the classical world is an illusion so it shifts the transition to something happening in your brain, but then doesn't explain how your brain could possibly create a world of discrete events happening in 3D space from a world where no discrete events ever happen that is just one giant continuous wave evolving in an infinite-dimensional space as there is no clear way to map the latter onto the former. Bell was around when Many Worlds was becoming popularized and so he did comment on it and pointed out it is nonsense and Everett never demonstrated any way to carry out this mapping consistently.
