SLSL quantum physics

[Terrance]

David Morris wrote:
> 
> --- jbor <jbor at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > >>> 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.
> > >>
> > >
> > > 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"
> 
> I agree w/ Rob that this Low Lands quote was obviously meant by Pynchon to
> point toward the "Uncertainty Principle."  

why?



And all of Pynchon's texts are about
> individuals' attempts to "nail down" what are the numinous and ominous forces
> and patterns all around, before, and after, to "understand" what is always
> proving to be uncertain.  Here is an example of a charcter trying NOT to nail
> down his perception, instinctively knowing that he will loose some essence of
> "true lies" if he does.  Whether he understands QM, he is trying to tie it into
> his fiction as a literary trope.

yeah, welll that is  obvious. so what?