49,076
edits
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
82.2.136.93, 'If the best explanation the writers can come up with is "Consequences still remain", I'm sorry, but that's a pretty poor explanation': It would be a poor explanation if it were an explanation but it isn't -- from an in-universe point of view, it's an effect that has not (yet) been explained. No definitive full explanation has been given, so far. Not too long ago, the notion that electrons (say) could behave sometimes as particles and sometimes as waves was regarded as "a monstrous pile of nonsense". Despite that, the machines we're using to conduct this discussion only work because the damned things '''do '''behave that way! I grant you that the writers have given themselves a difficult task in devising a satisfactory full explanation of the phenomena they've presented to us and I hope that the eventual explanation will (a) be devised with rather less delay than quantum theory was and (b) be somewhat easier to understand. Nevertheless, you ought to bear in mind that "I don't understand how it can be that way" is not the same as "It cannot be that way". If you dislike the situation the writers have created, that's fair enough -- and you're far from alone in disliking it. Please try, though, not to confuse a '''description '''of what happens, which "consequences still remain" is, with an '''explanation '''of what happens, which "consequences still remain" is not and is not intended to be. --[[Special:Contributions/78.146.181.237|78.146.181.237]] 14:30, November 27, 2011 (UTC) | 82.2.136.93, 'If the best explanation the writers can come up with is "Consequences still remain", I'm sorry, but that's a pretty poor explanation': It would be a poor explanation if it were an explanation but it isn't -- from an in-universe point of view, it's an effect that has not (yet) been explained. No definitive full explanation has been given, so far. Not too long ago, the notion that electrons (say) could behave sometimes as particles and sometimes as waves was regarded as "a monstrous pile of nonsense". Despite that, the machines we're using to conduct this discussion only work because the damned things '''do '''behave that way! I grant you that the writers have given themselves a difficult task in devising a satisfactory full explanation of the phenomena they've presented to us and I hope that the eventual explanation will (a) be devised with rather less delay than quantum theory was and (b) be somewhat easier to understand. Nevertheless, you ought to bear in mind that "I don't understand how it can be that way" is not the same as "It cannot be that way". If you dislike the situation the writers have created, that's fair enough -- and you're far from alone in disliking it. Please try, though, not to confuse a '''description '''of what happens, which "consequences still remain" is, with an '''explanation '''of what happens, which "consequences still remain" is not and is not intended to be. --[[Special:Contributions/78.146.181.237|78.146.181.237]] 14:30, November 27, 2011 (UTC) | ||
Well said. [[User:Boblipton|Boblipton]] <sup>[[User talk:Boblipton|talk to me]]</sup> 14:39, November 27, 2011 (UTC) |
edits