Quantum flip
Reality may not be quite as inscrutable as Anil Ananthaswamy suggests in his look at quantum wave-particle duality (5 January, p 36). Instead of abandoning “any pretence of understanding the outcome” of the interferometer experiments he describes, we can pay attention to a neglected aspect of quantum observations, namely the measuring apparatus.
We don’t need to go as far as Einstein’s largely discredited suggestion of a hidden layer of reality that “tells” the photon what experiment is to be performed. How it interacts with the apparatus can do that. When we take this into account, everything in the article makes sense, and some of it is predictable. The interferometer experiment is in effect a quantum superposition of two types of apparatus, and it produces a superposition of the corresponding observations.
In a very loose analogy, think of a spinning coin. If it is observed by interacting with a cricket pitch, it has only two states: heads or tails. If it is observed in mid-air by the human eye, it is a fuzzy sphere. The “real” coin is neither; which aspect you observe depends on which apparatus you use.
Developing this viewpoint into genuine mathematical physics, and performing experiments, would be much harder than writing a short informal letter.There are obstacles, though I suspect these can be overcome.
What the coin analogy does achieve, even if it has no relation to quantum reality, is to show that Einstein was asking the wrong question when he focused on the internal state of the system. The nature of the apparatus matters too.
The article discussing the wave-particle duality problem reminded me of a 1976 lecture handout from Eric Ash, a professor in the department of electronic engineering at University College London. In it he says the term “wave-particle duality” is just the usual “jargon”, but “an unfortunate one”.
He continues: “The ‘answer’ to the problem raised by experiments of the two slit variety is in one sense so simple that it is difficult to grasp. It is: an electron is neither a wave nor a particle. It is an electron. This statement should be repeated twice a day, preferably whilst standing in front of a mirror. Once you believe it, many difficulties disappear.”
La Tour-d’Aigues, Vaucluse, France
War of words
David Robson’s feature “‘Sno myth” was subtitled: “Eskimos really do have at least 50 words for snow” (22/29 December 2012, p 72). He wrote that anthropologist Franz Boas “sparked off the claim” about Eskimoan languages having numerous snow words; that “most linguists considered it an urban legend”; and that Smithsonian researcher Igor Krupnik and colleagues have refuted the linguists, suggesting that “Boas was right all along”.
However, Boas never made the numerosity claim. He simply noted that different languages draw different concept boundaries: one, like English, might distinguish running water (river) from still water (lake); another, like Inuit, might distinguish falling snow (qanik) from fallen snow (aput). The uninformed rumours about prodigious numbers of snow words (“it is said that the Eskimos have n words for snow”) came decades later. Linguists mostly paid little attention.
My 1989 essay (aimed primarily at informing linguists about anthropologist Laura Martin’s work on the spread of the snow-words myth) stressed that people never scrutinised the n-words-for-snow factoid 鈥� they just repeated it with a new and ever larger n. We should avoid giving aid and comfort to myth-spreaders.
鈥� I respect Geoff Pullum’s desire to defend his side of this linguistic debate. When considering these languages, it can be very difficult to tell the difference between independent words reflecting commonly accepted categories of snow, and derivations that are more like a descriptive flourish.
Yet the more recent attempts to document the Eskimo snow terminology, led by Igor Krupnik and others, nevertheless find evidence for a rich vocabulary in some Eskimo languages.
Regarding Boas’s contribution, although he never put a number to his claims, he did chart many examples, which helped put the idea of the many Eskimo snow words in motion.
Juicy incentive
It was good to read Reg Platt’s case for the use of wind power based on research (19 January, p 26). As he says, “the concerns of people who do not want wind power on their doorsteps need to be taken into account”, but this should not be allowed to prevent the development of such an environmentally advantageous energy source. There is one way opposition to turbines could be answered, and reduced. This is to lower the cost of electricity to people living near them.
This could be seen by some as “buying off” the opposition, but it would signal recognition of the fact that such locations, often remote, have something of great value to offer.
No cheers
Minimum alcohol pricing may not reduce consumption among those who see heavy drinking as an essential part of social activity, and who have disposable income (12 January, p 3). But the pricing may reward retailers, and punish poorer people who drink a little.
Perhaps restrictions should focus on the types of drinks most often abused. And what about plain labelling requirements and advertising restrictions? Maybe there is a need to set national targets for reducing consumption of some drinks, but probably the most important and elusive control method is to make heavy drinking socially unacceptable, as smoking is.
Making the grade
A negative correlation between economic performance and test scores in mathematics and science subjects, which was highlighted in your look at the gap between the West and Asia, does not surprise me (5 January, p 22). In a school with a broad international intake it is often the case that the student from a culture that prizes exam success above all else does not really see the benefits of looking beyond the curriculum.
However, we should be wary of celebrating creativity and initiative alone, as they have diluted value if they lack substance. Testing by exam remains a useful tool for encouraging students to persevere with building a sound foundation of knowledge.
Bug wrapper
Carrie Arnold discusses the idea that symbiotic microbes help drive the evolution of their hosts (12 January, p 30). Could a collection of microbes in the very distant past, a precursor of our present-day microbiome, have started the whole co-evolutionary process? Perhaps by wrapping itself in a protective outer layer of cohesive cells, it eventually evolved into a multicellular organism in its own right, and housed the microbiome 鈥� that is, the precursor of “us”.
We might think of the microbiome not just as a creator of species, as described, but even as the originator of multicellular organisms. Is the microbiome in charge, with we humans mere packaging?
Stepping stone
快猫短视频 reported possible NASA plans to capture a 7-metre-wide asteroid and place it in the moon’s orbit (2 January, newscientist.com). A great idea, but why not go for a larger rock to have a permanent platform in lunar orbit from which to launch missions?
It makes sense to put one in high Earth orbit too, for the same reason. Then conventional transports 鈥� heavy-lift rockets such as Atlas and Delta 鈥� could reach it, dock and transfer supplies. With provisioned and fuelled supply depots also offering emergency shelter, not only is risk reduced, but also potentially, mission complexity and long-term cost.
Turn on, tune out
Video game tournaments as a spectator “sport” provide fodder for the mindless, and attract more to couch-potato land (12 January, p 20). It is sad that, for these folk, constructive hobbies are being drowned in a sea of sterile entertainment.
Get beavering
The news article on climate change suggests that streams and rivers powering European hydroelectric projects will flow more strongly in winter and less so in the summer, causing problems (1 December 2012, p 9). The answer is beavers. They not only store water in their dams, but also in the raised water table on either side of their streams, evening out the seasonal flow.
In terms of water conservation, they play a role similar to that of glaciers. Plant deciduous trees along the streams and introduce pairs of these furry engineers. Within a decade a watershed can be re-beavered.
Beginner's luck?
Peter Bauer in his letter notes the need for curiosity to overcome established information and experience (19 January, p 31). In my experience it is when entering a new field, where you don’t know the accepted ideas, that useful new approaches often arise.
For the record
鈥� In our story on new bird-scaring methods for flight paths (19 January, p 22), we should have said that Technology International is in Laplace, Louisiana.
鈥� An ironical misuse of the word had us describing Terry Erwin of the Smithsonian Institution as an etymologist. Since we report his work with insects, we should have realised that he is in fact an entomologist. (12 January, p 18).
鈥� Reporting on a treatment for age-related macular degeneration, what we labelled as the ciliary body in a diagram of the eye is, of course, the choroid (19 January, p 8).
鈥� We got our Jeffrey Kahns muddled in our Insight on genome privacy (26 January, p 8). We incorrectly attributed quotes by Jeffrey Kahn at Johns Hopkins University to his namesake at Florida State University.