SLSL quantum physics

[Terrance]

jbor wrote:
> 
> 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.


Yeah, well obviously  you've not read the books, and so I see no reason
to take up these issues with you untill you have.