SLSL quantum physics

[jbor]

on 12/2/03 5:47 AM, Terrance at lycidas2 at earthlink.net wrote:

>> 
>>> There are no
>>> direct references in GR or elsewhere in Pynchon's writing to quantum
>>> mechanics or even allusions to the physicists whose work in the first
>>> half of the century led to the creation of the atomic bombs
>> 
>>> From 'Low-lands' (1960):
>> 
>> " ... as long as you are passive you can remain aware of the truth's
>> extent but the minute you become active you are somehow, if not
>> violating a convention outright, at least screwing up the perspective
>> of things, much as anyone observing subatomic particles changes the
>> works, data and odds, by the act of observing. ... " (p. 69)
>> 
>> It's about as direct a reference to quantum mechanics as you'll ever see.
>> 
>> best
> 
> 
> Well, I won't quibble over the word "Direct."  Brownlie and Moore
> discuss Heisenberg. This kind of allusion to the uncertainty principle,
> they assert,  is not a Direct reference.

It's pretty much a direct restatement of the Theory of Indeterminacy. In
fact, it's a clearer and more succinct definition than anything Heisenberg
ever wrote on it.

> Furthermore, and more
> importantly, if Pynchon knows anything about QM he doesn't use that
> knowledge in his fictions.

I'd disagree with this assertion very strongly. I think that (in forty words
or less) rather than presenting the reader with how the world "is", Pynchon
is constantly showing how the world is perceived to be, and how the
processes of perception can and do actually alter the way the world "is".

best