Project and content management for Contemporary Authors volumes
WORK TITLE: What Is Real?
WORK NOTES:
PSEUDONYM(S):
BIRTHDATE: 1984
WEBSITE: http://freelanceastrophysicist.com/
CITY: Oakland
STATE: CA
COUNTRY: United States
NATIONALITY: American
RESEARCHER NOTES:
PERSONAL
Born 1984.
EDUCATION:Cornell University, B.A., 2006; University of Michigan, M.S., 2007, Ph.D., 2012.
ADDRESS
CAREER
Writer and educator. New Scientist, website designer and coder; then Public Library of Science (PLoS), researcher in Labs division; University of California, Berkeley, visiting scholar at the Office for History of Science and Technology. Also recorded a video series with the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and several podcasts with the Story Collider.
WRITINGS
Contributor to periodicals, including New Scientist, Scientific American, and Aeon. Also writes for various media outlets, including the British Broadcasting Corporation, National Public Radio, and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) series Nova.
SIDELIGHTS
Adam Becker is a science writer who earned a Ph.D. in astrophysics. His interests have focused primarily on the history and philosophy of the foundations of quantum physics, especially since World War II. His other interests include open-access publishing in the sciences and early-universe cosmology. A contributor to periodicals and various media outlets, Becker is also part of the California Quantum Interpretation Network, a research collaboration among faculty and staff at multiple University of California campuses and other universities across the state, focusing on the interpretation of quantum physics.
In his debut book What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics, Becker examines quantum physics within an historical context. Becker notes on his website that he has wanted to write a book about physics for several years. In an interview with On Your Wavelength website contributor Zoe Budrikis, Becker noted the impetus behind his wanting to examine quantum physics in a book, commenting: “I read pop science books that seemed very clear when it came to relativity, but didn’t do a very good job with quantum physics.” Becker went on to relate that he thought he would understand quantum physics better when he took classes in college but that he ended up understanding the field even less. “After I asked one too many questions about quantum measurement, one professor told me (in a tone of utter disdain) that if I was interested in that kind of question, I should go off to the philosophy department,” Becker told On Your Wavelength website contributor Budrikis, adding: “When I did, I started getting some very different (and much more clear) answers than I was getting from most of the physicists.” Between talking with his philosophy and physics professors, Becker became dedicated to gaining a better understanding of quantum physics.
What Is Real? chronicles the evolving view of quantum physics over the years. Becker points out that physicist Niels Bohr developed the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics in 1925. This interpretation says that subatomic particles lack definite properties until they undergo measurement. According to Bohr, it is only possible to calculate the probability of a specific result, such as an electron’s location. Furthermore, measurement impacts the system and leads from various probabilities to only one of the possible values immediately after the measurement, which is called the wave function collapse.
For decades, this interpretation was agreed upon by most physicists, who, at the same time, refused to address questions about quantum physics being meaningless. Despite Bohr’s students being committed to protecting his legacy, eventually the status quo was questioned. One issue was the physics community favoring practical experiments rather than philosophical arguments. Becker describes the work of many physicists, such as John Bell and David Bohm, who risked being ostracized by their colleagues in order to find a better meaning for quantum mechanics. Becker examines the battle of ideas as physicists looked for a way to clarify the mathematics of quantum physics and what it reveals about the world. Becker points out that noted physicist Albert Einstein disagreed with Bohr’s theory, going against the beliefs of most of his colleagues.
After giving due credit to Bohm and Hugh Everett, who believed specific properties and location can be applied to particles without measurement, Becker details the work of John Bell. In 1964 Bell devised a theorem that said traditional quantum theory can be violated by certain phenomena, a theory that later was proved via experimentation. The book includes an appendix titled “Four Views of the Strangest Experiment,” as well as references and notes.
“Readers must put in the effort, but those who persist will come away with a taste of a basic scientific issue that a century of controversy has yet to resolve,” wrote a Publishers Weekly contributor. Travis Norsen, writing for the Quantum Times website, noted What Is Real? provides valuable information to physicists and scientists in general, adding: “Regular people—who are not professional scientists but who are intelligent, skeptical, and perhaps somewhat concerned about the corruption of science—will find, in Becker’s book, an inspiring story of how the scientific spirit can be kept alive (even in the face of deep corruption and even, when necessary, by a very small handful of individuals) by staying focused on that most scientific of all questions: ‘What is Real?'”
BIOCRIT
PERIODICALS
Kirkus Reviews, February 1, 2018, review of What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics.
Publishers Weekly, January 29, 2018, review of What Is Real?, p. 185.
ONLINE
Adam Becker Website, http://freelanceastrophysicist.com (July 7, 2018).
Center for Science, Technology, Medicine, & Society Website, http://cstms.berkeley.edu/ (July 7, 2018), author faculty profile.
On Your Wavelength, http://blogs.nature.com/onyourwavelength/ (March 26, 2018), Zoe Budrikis, “Interactions: Conversation with Adam Becker.”
Open Letters Review, https://openlettersreview.com/ (March 23, 2018), Steve Donoghue, review of What is Real?
Quantum Times, http://thequantumtimes.org/ (March 16, 2018), Travis Norsen, review of What is Real?
Adam Becker is a science writer with a PhD in astrophysics from the University of Michigan and a BA in philosophy and physics from Cornell. He has written for the BBC, NPR, Scientific American, New Scientist, and others. He has also recorded a video series with the BBC and several podcasts with the Story Collider. Adam is a visiting scholar at UC Berkeley's Office for History of Science and Technology and lives in Oakland, California.
Interactions: Conversation with Adam Becker
March 26, 2018 | 9:15 am | Posted by Zoe Budrikis | Category: Interactions
Post by Zoe Budrikis.
Quantum mechanics is a standard part of every undergraduate physics degree, but often it’s presented as “Here’s a mathematical formalism that works, end of story.” What is Real? by Adam Becker, released last week, tackles the history of how physicists have thought about the interpretation of quantum mechanics, starting with the Copenhagen interpretation but continuing through various dissenting views, such as Bohm’s pilot wave theory and Everett’s many worlds interpretation. His focus is as much on the politics and personalities that have shaped how we think about the field as it is on science and philosophy, which makes for an enlightening and entertaining read — I got through much of the book on a snowy Saturday at home, having difficulty putting it down.
We asked Adam some questions about the book and the stories behind it.
Basic Books
You mention on your website you’ve been wanting to write this book for years. What kicked off your interest in the foundations of quantum mechanics?
There wasn’t any single event—it was a gradual process. I read pop science books that seemed very clear when it came to relativity, but didn’t do a very good job with quantum physics. I figured I’d understand what they were talking about once I actually took a quantum mechanics class, but that just made things worse, not better. After I asked one too many questions about quantum measurement, one professor told me (in a tone of utter disdain) that if I was interested in that kind of question, I should go off to the Philosophy Department. When I did, I started getting some very different (and much more clear) answers than I was getting from most of the physicists. And not everyone in the Physics Department was unwilling to entertain questions about quantum physics: in particular, I was lucky enough to take a course with David Mermin as an undergraduate. After spending time talking with Mermin and with philosophers of science, I was hooked: I had to understand what was going on in the quantum world. Of course, I still don’t!
Are there any anecdotes from the history of quantum foundations that didn’t make it into the final book that you’d like to share with us?
There are so many great stories that made it into the book (Bell’s silence on the subject of Bertlmann’s socks might be my favorite), and there are also many good ones that didn’t. For example, von Neumann threw serious shade at Dirac’s textbook when he was writing his own, which was amazing to see. I don’t know about my favorite story, but here’s a fun one that I think is very revealing about the personalities involved: Abner Shimony (a prominent philosopher of physics) and Louis de Broglie (who needs no introduction). Shimony was one of the leaders of the four-person team that proposed the first experimental test of Bell’s theorem, known as CHSH after their initials. Shimony sent a preprint of the CHSH paper to Bell, of course, but he also sent a preprint to de Broglie, along with a letter. “I felt that courtesy demanded a letter in French, and I drafted one, but had a French professor friend correct the grammar and locutions,” said Shimony. “De Broglie replied, with the utmost courtesy, in handwriting that resembled the Declaration of Independence.” So Shimony sent back another letter in French, and had a French professor correct his grammar again. After another round or so of this, a mutual friend told Shimony that de Broglie was deeply impressed by Shimony’s letters. De Broglie said that “here is one American who knows how to write a proper letter.” But when their mutual friend offered to introduce Shimony to de Broglie, Shimony balked. “Of course I refused,” Shimony said, “because I obviously could not sustain the game!”
I understand if you’re reticent to answer this, because in your book you’ve obviously put a lot of work into presenting the various interpretations of quantum mechanics equitably, but I’d love to know: which alternative to Copenhagen do you actually prefer? Or are you still waiting for a satisfying interpretation?
John Castillo
The short answer is that I’m still waiting. The longer answer is that I go back and forth on liking all of the available options and liking none of them. (I don’t include Copenhagen in this, because it’s not a real interpretation.) Each interpretation has its appeal, and its problems. All of the interpretations are strange, of course—they’re guaranteed to be strange as a result of Bell’s theorem, the Bell-Kochen-Specker theorem, and other results. So strangeness isn’t a problem. But there’s the question of logical coherence, of presenting an internally consistent picture of the world, even if it’s a deeply alien one. And there’s also the question of reproducing not just the successes of quantum mechanics, but also those of quantum field theory and the Standard Model. The different interpretations attempt to meet these challenges in different ways. Many of them look promising, but right now I don’t think any of them can lay claim to an unequivocal solution to all of these problems. For example, pilot-wave theory is definitely coherent (even its opponents will generally concede that), but it’s unclear whether there’s a way to get QFT out of it. The many-worlds interpretation can definitely account for QFT, but there’s serious debate over its internal coherence. So for now, I’m on the fence, but I’m happy here. It’s certainly better to have serious debate over interesting options, even if I’m not convinced by any one of them, than it is to have debate stifled with a pseudo-solution like the Copenhagen interpretation.
In the final chapter, you talk about the fact that many physicists are unfamiliar with the history and philosophy of science (guilty as charged!). Can you suggest one or two current players in that field whose work you think more physicists should be familiar with?
It’s hard to just pick one or two! But off the top of my head: I think the philosopher David Albert and the historian Olival Freire Jr. are both doing really incredible work that more physicists should be familiar with. The first half of Albert’s book Quantum Mechanics and Experience is a brilliant introduction to the problems at the core of quantum physics (the later chapters are somewhat out of date but still make interesting reading). Albert continues to do a lot of good philosophical work in quantum foundations. He’s also made major contributions to other parts of the philosophy of physics, such as the philosophy of statistical mechanics. And Freire’s book The Quantum Dissidents is a phenomenal piece of historical scholarship. Without that book, I don’t know how I could possibly have written mine, not without years more research. Thankfully, Freire and his students did much of the research for me. Reading his book will change the way you look at the history of quantum physics.
What are your feelings about the future? Do you see alternatives to “shut up and calculate” becoming more mainstream in physics teaching and practice? Why/why not?
I hope so, and there’s reason for hope. There’s certainly been a trend over the past 40 years away from the Copenhagen interpretation. Mostly, that’s been a shift toward many-worlds, and I’d rather see a wider variety of options becoming mainstream, but it’s still a lot better than nothing. It’d be nice to foreground questions about quantum foundations a bit more in introductory quantum physics classes, and I don’t see that happening yet—and even when it does, there’s usually very little discussion of alternatives to Copenhagen. So I think (and hope) that’s the next big change coming: open discussion of different interpretations in introductory classes becoming the rule rather than the exception. The widely-used Griffiths textbook is a good step in the right direction, with its appendix on Bell’s theorem and interpretive issues, but there’s still more work to do there. Foregrounding the subject and expanding on it, rather than relegating it to an appendix, seems like the right move to me. But then again, I’m biased—I just wrote a whole book with quantum foundations as the foreground!
Adam Becker
CSTMS Research Unit: Office for the History of Science and Technology, CSTMS
Affiliation period: November 2016 -
Website
abecker@berkeley.edu
Degrees
Ph.D., Physics :: University of Michigan (2012)
M.S., Physics :: University of Michigan (2007)
B.A., Physics, Philosophy :: Cornell University (2006)
Research Areas
Adam's work is largely focused on the history and philosophy of the foundations of quantum physics, especially since World War II. He is currently writing a book on the subject, forthcoming from Basic Books in 2018. This work is supported in part by a generous grant from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Adam is also part of the California Quantum Interpretation Network, a research collaboration among faculty and staff at multiple UC campuses and other universities across California, focusing on the interpretation of quantum physics. In addition to his work in the foundations of quantum physics, Adam has research interests in open-access publishing in the sciences and early-universe cosmology.
last updated: May 12th, 2017
Hi.
I’m Dr. Adam Becker. I write and speak about science.
My book, What is Real?, is about the unfinished quest for the meaning of quantum physics. Quantum physics powers the cell phones in our pockets and the sun in our sky. It’s our most successful theory of the world. But there’s a hole at the heart of the theory: we don’t really understand what quantum physics is saying about the nature of reality. Physicists have debated this for over ninety years, and the story of that debate—the story I tell in my book—reveals a fascinating human side of the scientific enterprise. If you’re not a scientist, but you want to understand quantum physics, and you like reading about science and the people behind it, then this book is for you. What is Real? is already for sale in bookstores in the US and Canada, and will be available worldwide in June 2018. If you want a taste of what the book is like, check out this interactive essay based on the book, about the strangest result in all of quantum physics. (And if you want to be the first to get news about the book, my speaking schedule, and my other projects, sign up for email updates here.) Errata for the book are here.
I’ve been wanting to write a book about this for years, and I’m still astonished that it’s actually happened. Thanks to my publishers, Basic Books and John Murray—and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, which gave me a generous grant—I was able to spend two years writing this book nearly full-time.
In addition to my book, I’ve written for the BBC, NPR, New Scientist, Scientific American, Aeon, NOVA, and other science media outlets. I did a video series for the BBC, and I occasionally tell stories for the Story Collider podcast. I’m also currently a visiting scholar at the Office for History of Science and Technology at UC Berkeley.
I used to work at the Public Library of Science (PLOS), an open-access scientific publisher. I was a researcher in the Labs division, where I developed new tools to change the way scientific research results are shared. Before PLOS, I was at New Scientist magazine, where I designed and coded several interactive features for their website. I also wrote about new developments in physics, astronomy, and other areas of science and technology.
I earned a PhD in computational cosmology from the University of Michigan, where I worked with Dragan Huterer in the Physics Department. My thesis was on primordial non-Gaussianity, which is a fancy way of saying that I was trying to find out how much we can learn about the way stuff was arranged in the early universe by looking at the way stuff is arranged in the universe right now. While I was in graduate school, I had some adventures you might enjoy hearing about.
If you want me to come speak at your conference or institution, or if you want to contact me for any other reason, you can drop me a line here. You can also find me on Twitter, or send me an email. And if you want to find out where I’ll be speaking next, you can see my schedule here.
Becker, Adam: WHAT IS REAL?
Kirkus Reviews. (Feb. 1, 2018):
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2018 Kirkus Media LLC
http://www.kirkusreviews.com/
Full Text:
Becker, Adam WHAT IS REAL? Basic (Adult Nonfiction) $32.00 3, 20 ISBN: 978-0-465-09605-3
A historical exploration of quantum physics, which "predicts a stunning variety of phenomena to an extraordinary degree of accuracy."
The realm of quantum physics is extremely difficult to comprehend. According to Niels Bohr's "Copenhagen interpretation," largely devised in the 1920s, subatomic particles have no definite properties until they are measured. One can only calculate the probability of a certain result--for example, the location of an electron--and the very act of measurement changes matters. In his first book, astrophysicist and science writer Becker agrees with a minority of physicists that quantum physics needs a better interpretation "because it's not immediately clear what the theory is saying about the world. The mathematics of quantum physics is unfamiliar and abstruse, and the connection between the mathematics and the world we live in is hard to see." Until his death, Einstein insisted that this bizarre picture couldn't be correct, but most colleagues disagreed. Becker summarizes the debate and then takes up the cudgel. Einstein's objections never caught on, but successors have had some success. David Bohm and Hugh Everett maintained that particles have specific properties and location, but they also introduced complex concepts such as nonlocality, hidden variables, and a many-worlds view. The leading genius was John Bell, whose 1964 theorem postulates certain phenomena that violate traditional quantum theory. Subsequent extremely delicate experiments proved him right. Quantum physics works, so most physicists don't concern themselves with its view of reality, and the debate rarely reaches popular media. It's a philosophical question whose major figures are not household names and whose arguments do not simplify matters. The author works diligently to introduce them to a lay audience. Readers must put in the effort, but those who persist will come away with a taste of a basic scientific issue that a century of controversy has yet to resolve.
A useful introduction to the history of quantum theory for scientifically inclined readers.
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
"Becker, Adam: WHAT IS REAL?" Kirkus Reviews, 1 Feb. 2018. General OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A525461516/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=ITOF&xid=5101c65b. Accessed 28 May 2018.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A525461516
What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics
Publishers Weekly. 265.5 (Jan. 29, 2018): p185.
Copyright: COPYRIGHT 2018 PWxyz, LLC
http://www.publishersweekly.com/
Full Text:
* What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics
Adam Becker. Basic, $32 (384p) ISBN 978-0465-09605-3
Quantum physics is "stubbornly mute on the question" of what is real, writes science writer Becker in this fresh debut. Most physicists in the early 20th century believed quantum physics revealed nothing about the everyday world; it was seen as the "shut up and calculate method." It's the dissenters to that view who take center stage here: scientist David Bohm challenged the status quo with his pilot-wave theory in the 1950s; Hugh Everett followed his curiosity to the sci-fi-like "many-worlds" interpretation; and John Stewart Bell's "scathing critic's pen" led to his eponymous theorem, later called the "most profound discovery of science." Catchy chapter openers ("It was the Summer of Love in New York City, and John Clauser was cooped up in a room at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies") and vivid biographical portraits enliven even dense theoretical explanations with wit and bite. Readers trace decades of experiments, alternative philosophies, and surprising drama in the physics boys' club to three intriguing possibilities: "Either nature is nonlocal in some way, or we live in branching multiple worlds despite appearances to the contrary"--or quantum physics is incomplete. With his crisp voice, Becker lucidly relates the complicated history of quantum foundations. (Mar.)
Source Citation (MLA 8th Edition)
"What Is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics." Publishers Weekly, 29 Jan. 2018, p. 185. General OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A526116581/ITOF?u=schlager&sid=ITOF&xid=64fcad94. Accessed 28 May 2018.
Gale Document Number: GALE|A526116581
Book Review: “What is Real?” by Adam Becker
admin March 16, 2018 Book Reviews 4
Reviewed by Travis Norsen
Adam Becker’s “What is Real?” [Basic Books, New York, 2018, 370 pages] provides a carefully-researched but non-technical and popularly-accessible overview of “the unfinished quest for the meaning of quantum physics.” The book’s early chapters sketch the historical development of quantum mechanics, explain the challenge of understanding the iconic double-slit experiment, discuss Schroedinger’s infamous cat, recount the legendary debates between Einstein and Bohr, and explore the dramatic interactions between physics and politics, culture, and world history during the second World War.
But there is something that sets Becker’s book apart from the dozens of other books that fit the above description: the author has not drunk the Copenhagen Kool-Aid. This is not, therefore, the kind of book the revels, gee-whiz style, in the impossibility of making rational sense of the micro-world. It does not serve up yet another stale retelling of Bohr’s supposed triumph over the doddering Einstein. And it does not imply that the point of Schroedinger’s cat is that, according to quantum mechanics, the cat is (whoa dude) both alive and dead. This is simply not that kind of pop quantum book.
Instead we are treated (in “Part I: A Tranquilizing Philosophy”) to an extremely serious and clear-headed explanation of the quantum measurement problem – which it was, of course, Schroedinger’s goal to articulate and dramatize with the cat. Regarding Einstein and Bohr, Becker has taken the time to actually understand what Bohr never quite managed, namely that Einstein’s fundamental concern with the orthodox interpretation was not about indeterminism or uncertainty, but rather the fact that the orthodox interpretation implied a kind of non-locality that seemed to make it incompatible with (Einstein’s own) relativity theory. Reversing the narrative structure of the standard account, then, Einstein and Schroedinger play here the heroes’ role, while Bohr and Heisenberg are depicted … less sympathetically.
Another thing that sets “What is Real?” apart from most pop quantum books is that it neither stops in the 1930s nor jumps ahead to the latest generation of (11-dimensional, multiverse) gee-whiz speculation. Instead, the heart of the book (“Part II: Quantum Dissidents”) tells the stories of several physicists who kept “the quest for the meaning of quantum physics” alive in the 1950s and 60s, when a combination of the Copenhagen tranquilizing philosophy and post-war pragmatism had made the broader physics community simply abandon the quest. The sketches here of the lives of David Bohm, Hugh Everett III, and John Stewart Bell are very beautifully crafted. Becker does a nice job of explaining the pilot-wave and many-worlds theories (of Bohm and Everett respectively) as candidate solutions to the measurement problem. And unlike so many commentators, Becker actually gets Bell’s theorem right: “Einstein had proven that quantum physics must choose between locality and completeness, but Bell’s … proof showed that the choice is actually between locality and correctness.”
The book’s third major section (“Part III: The Great Enterprise”) gives a somewhat more fast-paced account of progress in “the quest” during the last 30 or 40 years. Characters here include John Clauser, Dieter Zeh, Abner Shimony, David Albert, Alain Aspect, Nicolas Gisin, David Deutsch, Chris Dewdney, Bryce DeWitt, GianCarlo Ghirardi, and Philip Pearle. We learn about the various activities of this new generation of quantum dissidents as they work on developing novel theoretical concepts, honing and exploring the ideas of Bohm and Everett, developing a third candidate solution to the measurement problem, pushing forward on both theoretical and experimental fronts to connect Bell’s proof with empirical data, and generally continuing to fight bravely against the orthodox quantum philosophy’s “claim that it is somehow inappropriate or unscientific to ask what is going on in the quantum realm.”
I found the writing throughout the book to be clear and engaging, although some of the examples and analogies used to convey the occasionally slightly technical details are a little bit cutesy for my taste. This is probably to some extent unavoidable in a book that is attempting to explain the twisted science, history, and sociology of quantum mechanics to a mass market audience. But these couple of glitzy and deliberately silly explanations did, for me at least, slightly undermine the serious tone – appropriate for the extremely serious topic – that Becker otherwise manages to achieve, even while keeping the narrative accessible and highly engaging. This may, however, be the kind of complaint that only readers of “The Quantum Times” are likely to make; the intended audience of the book may instead appreciate the occasional light-hearted explanations.
A second minor complaint is that, at a few points, Becker makes it sound as if the thing that’s really weird and difficult to comprehend about quantum mechanics is that it describes particles as not really particles at all, but instead as waves. But if it were the case that quantum mechanics (for example) described electrons as localized wave-like disturbances in a field, what valid objection could there be to this? None that I can think of. The truth, of course, is that (contrary to what many people, even many physicists, seem to believe) quantum mechanics does not describe electrons in this way. Instead of N wave-like disturbances in a field, the theory describes a system of N electrons as a single wave-like disturbance in an abstract, 3N-dimensional space whose connection to ordinary three-dimensional physical reality is, at best, completely obscure. Maybe one is simply not permitted to mention things like “configuration space” in a book searching for a wide popular audience, but I fear that sharp non-expert readers may get the impression that the quantum dissidents were worrying about a non-problem because Becker doesn’t convey the full depth of the orthodox theory’s failure to provide even a comprehensible candidate account of “What is real”.
My only other complaint about the book is really a compliment: it ended too soon. I would have enjoyed (at least) one more chapter to bring the narrative all the way up to the present day.
The nominal focus of Becker’s book is the quest to understand “What is real?” in the micro-physical realm described by quantum mechanics. It is worth noting here that, despite clearly taking the side of the quantum dissidents against the Copenhagen orthodoxy, Becker does not push any particular interpretational agenda. Instead, he (appropriately and refreshingly) maintains an even-handed and non-dogmatic attitude. This is well-captured by his closing summary of “the great enterprise”:
“…we physicists should learn the different interpretations available and keep them all in mind while working. Hold on to them loosely, not dogmatically, and keep a fresh perspective on the work we do. I’m not saying that interpretations of quantum physics are something that every physicist should work on, any more than every physicist should be working on any other specific open problem in physics, like quantum gravity…. But all physicists should be aware of the problem and passingly familiar with the field…. Pluralism about interpretations might be the right answer, pragmatically, while we face that challenge. Or if not pluralism, at least humility. Quantum physics is at least approximately correct. There is something real, out in the world, that somehow resembles the quantum. We just don’t know what that means yet. And it’s the job of physics to find out.”
This is a book that can help remind even the most passionately sectarian participants in debates about the interpretation of quantum mechanics that we are allies in the same basic quest.
The book’s core value, though, lies in the much-needed light it sheds on the question of “What is real?” – not in the micro-physics sense I mentioned above, but regarding the history and sociology of the last century’s most successful and important physics theory. Becker, in short, sets the record straight – exposing the myths and distorted narratives told by Bohr’s followers, and identifying the true heroes as the dissidents who sacrificed so much to maintain fealty to what physics was, is, and should be all about. Most of the history and perspective that Becker lays out can be found elsewhere – in Bell’s papers, in biographies of Bohm and Everett and Bell, in the books of Jim Cushing and Mara Beller, etc. But Becker has done a great service in putting this fascinating story together into a single easily-digestible volume that is gripping, authoritative … and true.
As I mentioned above, I think experts in quantum foundations will find value in this book. It should also be of considerable interest to physicists from other, “regular” sub-fields, and non-physicist scientists more generally. Maybe this will be the book that triggers the desperately-needed phase transition in which regular scientists realize that most of what they’ve been told about quantum physics is naked, unscientific nonsense? And finally, regular people – who are not professional scientists but who are intelligent, skeptical, and perhaps somewhat concerned about the corruption of science – will find, in Becker’s book, an inspiring story of how the scientific spirit can be kept alive (even in the face of deep corruption and even, when necessary, by a very small handful of individuals) by staying focused on that most scientific of all questions: “What is Real?” The book is, in that sense, quite timely in a way the author could not have anticipated during its writing.
I sincerely hope it gains an extremely wide readership and manages to have a powerful influence.
What is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics by Adam Becker
March 23, 2018 Steve Donoghue
What is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics
by Adam Becker
Basic Books, 2018
Science writer Adam Becker begins his tremendously appealing new book What is Real? The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics in the only place this kind of book really can begin: with German physicist Erwin Schrödinger and a dead cat.
The feline in question, known far afield of the physics world, is Schrödinger's Cat, and it stars in a thought experiment designed to illustrate one of the most peculiar aspects of quantum physics. A cat (several physics-popularizers gratuitously refer to the animal as an “innocent” cat, although the smarter half of humanity knows this is a categorical impossibility) is placed in a box along with a small mass of radioactive material connected to a Geiger counter. If the Geiger counter detects radioactive decay, it trips a hammer that shatters a vial of poison, killing the cat. Since the radioactive decay is totally random, there's no way for an outside observer to know the state of the cat unless that outsider observer opens the box. In the world-view of quantum physics, prior to the opening of the box the cat is in a superposition, a floating cloud of possibilities that include both living and dead. Its final state is not only observed by opening the box – it's determined by opening the box.
Or so went the Copenhagen interpretation, which seemed to make alarming implications about a universe that doesn't quite exist in the traditional fixed sense of the term unless it's being watched. And flowing from that was another ramification of quantum physics, equally alarming: two quantum particles, having once interacted with each other, are entangled forever – alter the spin or position of one, and the spin or position of the other is simultaneously altered, regardless of the physical space separating the two. This flies in the face of several settled, accepted understandings of physics, including the unmovable ceiling of the speed of light – leading Albert Einstein, among others, to contend that since cause must always precede effect and things must always travel to their destinations in order to reach them, something must be rotten in the state of the quantum understanding of reality. Surely, objectors asserted, there must be some kind of hidden information tipping off the whole process. But decades of experimentation have shown that such hidden variables don't exist – and that, therefore, the fundamental bedrock of all reality is a constant, baffling fizz of not-quite-reality.
And yet, reality works. And this apparent contradiction is at the heart of Becker's book, which takes readers through all of these epic discoveries and disagreements, always with the subject's deepest questions (like the book's title) foremost in view. “If the unobservable 'metaphysical' content of our best scientific theories,” Becker asks, “ – stuff like electrons – really bear no relation to all the actual stuff in the world, then why do are scientific theories work at all?”
Books like What Is Real? live or die by the companionability of the author, and in this case Becker is a perfect choice to make sense of it all (or at least whatever sense is possible). He smoothly, easily dramatizes the great debates and the outsized personalities of quantum physics and fits it all into an enthusiastic, readable narrative, and along the way he digresses wonderfully on a wide variety of scientific phenomena. About the creation of thermite, for instance, he first warns his readers not to try this particular creation themselves (just in case the possibility of self immolation wasn't warning enough) and then describes it with a nifty brevity. “Not only is the thermite reaction amazingly intense, but it continues to run until the rust and aluminum are used up, no matter what you do to it,” he writes. “You can put it underwater, you can cover it with sand, you can even put it in the vacuum of space – it will keep burning.”
Of course Becker knows better than anybody that the question posed in the title of his book currently has no answer. Indeed, the blame for the lack of an answer can be laid squarely at the doorstep of quantum physics, which is eminently testable and predictable and confirmable but completely refuses to be comforting. But reading What is Real? will give you a toehold, at least. This is our story so far.
Steve Donoghue was a founding editor of Open Letters Monthly. His book criticism has appeared in the Boston Globe, the Wall Street Journal, and the American Conservative. He writes regularly for the National, the Washington Post, the Vineyard Gazette, and the Christian Science Monitor. His website is http://www.stevedonoghue.com.