Hello Mr Steve. I'm not sure I understand a certain passage from a book Holographic Universe by Michael Talbot. He wrote something about EPR paradox. Einstein didn't agree with Bohr's views.
The book says:

Bohr remained unperturbed by Einstein's argument. Rather than
believing that some kind of faster-than-light communication was taking place, he offered another explanation. If subatomic particles do not exist until they are observed, then one could no longer think of them as independent "things. " Thus Einstein was basing his argument on an error when he viewed twin particles as separate. They were part of an indivisible system, and it was meaningless to think of them otherwise.

In time most physicists sided with Bohr and became content that his
interpretation was correct. One factor that contributed to Bohr's triumph was that quantum physics had proved so spectacularly successful in predicting phenomena, few physicists were willing even to consider the possibility that it might be faulty in some way. In addition, when Einstein and his colleagues first made their proposal about twin particles, technical and other reasons prevented such an experiment from actually being performed. This made it even easier to put out of mind. This was curious, for although Bohr had designed his argument to counter Einstein's attack on quantum theory, as we will see, Bohr's view that
subatomic systems are indivisible has equally profound implications for the nature of reality. Ironically, these implications were also ignored, and once again the potential importance of interconnect-edness was swept under the carpet.   

--- What does the sentence "this made it even easier to put out of mind" refer to? Does it mean that because they (Einstein and his colleagues) were not able to perform experiments it was easier for people to forget about the twin particles proposal? And why did author write that "This was curious"? I'm just not sure what the author is referring to in these sentences, the last sentences. They're not clear to me. Can you explain that to me?

Thank you

He's just trying (not so well, in my opinion) to describe the state of mind of the scientists who were trying to decide which interpretation to use in their work on quantum mechanics.  The statement "this was curious" is probably in reference to the fact that scientists rarely discard a theory out of hand.  String theory is currently relatively untestable, but garners a great deal of attention from theorists attempting to put the whole universe under one conceptual framework.  That's really about it, nothing of direct scientific relevance there, just commentary about attitudes and what the body of scientists at the time tended to believe and why.


All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


Dr. Stephen O. Nelson


I can answer most basic physics questions, physics questions about science fiction and everyday observations of physics, etc. I'm also usually good for science fair advice (I'm the regional science fair director). I do not answer homework problems. I will occasionally point out where a homework solution went wrong, though. I'm usually good at explaining odd observations that seem counterintuitive, energy science, nuclear physics, nuclear astrophysics, and alternative theories of physics are my specialties.


I was a physics professor at the University of Texas of the Permian Basin, research in nuclear technology and nuclear astrophysics. My travelling science show saw over 20,000 students of all ages. I taught physics, nuclear chemistry, radiation safety, vacuum technology, and answer tons of questions as I tour schools encouraging students to consider careers in science. I moved on to a non-academic job with more research just recently.

Ph. D. from Duke University in physics, research in nuclear astrophysics reactions, gamma-ray astronomy technology, and advanced nuclear reactors.

©2017 All rights reserved.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]