J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone...

How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. Now we have some hope of making progress. Nowadays, the individual seems to be able to choose the spiritual framework of his thoughts and Naturally, it still makes no difference whether the observer is a man, an animal, or a piece of...The doctor suggests he should wait a few days to see how his symptoms develop. Page 15 Exercise 3b Doctor Good morning, Mr Blaine. heard his favourite book before reading it L identified with a particular situation rather than specific characters S identified with naughty children in general C liked...Aplying this idea, he used the correct momentum of his hand over a short period of time and that is how he was able to break the piece of wood.16. As he had already passed his medical, Dean was able to start immediately. Steve went home. He noticed a piece of paper which had been left on the doorstep as he walked towards the door. As he struggles to reconcile his distaste for crime and brutality with his sense of family honour and duty...Einstein tuned in his violin but every time Eisler started a musical piece, Einstein _ get it right. Пояснение . Her mother hoped that Melanie _ able to control her emotions and finally have a few friends. Показать другие задания этого блока.

English File third edition Upper-intermediate Student s Book answer...

How is Dr. Hewitt able to break a piece of wood in his demonstration? What would Dr. Hewitt need to have done to exert an even greater force than he did in his karate demonstration? Increase the change in momentum, and decrease the time duration.is angry his friends have accused him of being a bully. believes he will never be friends with Chris and Will again. is continually looked at by Will and Chris during the lessons. keeping his promise is the most important thing to him. stopping himself from saying nasty things will be impossible.1. Pick up the pieces of the broken cup and throw them out. 2. In his historical novels Walter Scott gave a wonderful description not only of historical events, but of whole historical epochs .His idea was that as she was "such a big girl", it should be much better for her to pick it out herself. "I say, Sam," said the shopkeeper coming up to the man who had put the piece of butter in his hat. After dinner the king showed his pictures to the painter and asked, "Well, how do you like them now?"

How is dr. Hewitt able to break a piece of wood in his... - Brainly.com

3. If all the woods on the planet are cut down, what kind of air will we breathe? 5. Doctors often advise smokers to cut down on cigarettes first and then give up smoking altogether. 6. They say that several scenes have been cut out of the film.to use assembly line production for his Model T car in 1908. a) Ernest Rutherford b) Henry Ford c) 1 Which is the most/ least useful piece of advice in the text? couldn't make an omelette because there were eggs.2. He said that of the … people we invited to the party were able to come.3. We got to the...How long has this Great Reset been in the works? The answers to these questions can help us understand the true goals of this agenda. The Great Reset graphic details how everything from drones, blockchain, the future of energy, LGBTI inclusion, and 3D printing will play a role in the New...Terry couldn't understand why his printer was not……… properly. The politician said that the government was currently……. on a new policy to combat crime in the inner city. Tania had the job of….. a large pile of documents that needed checking before being forwarded to another department.How could Fauci guarantee a surprise outbreak to happen during the first term of the Trump administration? In his lyrics he described a global pandemic that kills millions, shuts down economies and gives rise to Because of satefy reasons she is not able to share more details about this in public.

The nice extension of our enjoy in recent years has introduced gentle to the insufficiency of our easy mechanical conceptions and, as a end result, has shaken the foundation on which the normal interpretation of commentary was once primarily based.

Niels Henrik David Bohr (7 October 1885 – 18 November 1962) was once a Danish physicist. He gained the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1922 for his contributions which have been very important to trendy understandings of atomic construction and quantum mechanics.

The word "reality" is also a phrase, a phrase which we will have to learn to use as it should be. We are all agreed that your concept is crazy. The query that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being proper. Physics is to be looked no longer such a lot as the find out about of one thing a priori given, but quite as the development of strategies of ordering and surveying human revel in. It is unsuitable to suppose that the duty of physics is to in finding out how nature is. Physics issues what we will say about nature... It is a great pity that human beings cannot find all of their delight in scientific contemplativeness. Some topics are so critical that one can simplest shaggy dog story about them. Those who aren't stunned when they first come across quantum principle can not possibly have understood it. In a 1952 dialog with Heisenberg and Pauli in Copenhagen; quoted in Heisenberg, Werner, Physics and Beyond. (New York: Harper & Row, 1971) p. 206.We should be transparent that when it comes to atoms, language can be used best as in poetry. The poet, too, is not just about so fascinated by describing details as with developing photographs and setting up mental connections. In his first meeting with Werner Heisenberg in early summer 1920, in response to questions on the nature of language, as reported in Discussions about Language (1933); quoted in Defense Implications of International Indeterminacy (1972) through Robert J. Pranger, p. 11, and Theorizing Modernism : Essays in Critical Theory (1993) by way of Steve Giles, p. 28The grand discoveries which medical experiment yielded at and in regards to the flip of the century, in which investigators in many nations took an eminent part and that have been destined all hastily to give us a fresh perception into the construction of atoms, have been due in the primary instance, as all are mindful, to the paintings of the great investigators of the English faculty, Sir Joseph Thomson and Sir Ernest Rutherford, who have inscribed their names on the drugs of the historical past of medical analysis as outstanding witnesses to the truth that imagination and acumen are succesful of penetrating the crowded mass of registered experience and of revealing Nature's simplicity to our gaze. Niels Bohr's speech on the Nobel Banquet in Stockholm (December 10, 1922)The great extension of our enjoy in contemporary years has introduced gentle to the insufficiency of our simple mechanical conceptions and, as a outcome, has shaken the foundation on which the normal interpretation of observation was based. Niels Bohr, "Atomic Physics and the Description of Nature" (1934)Isolated subject matter debris are abstractions, their houses being definable and observable only thru their interaction with other systems. "Atomic Physics and the Description of Nature" (1934)What is it that we humans rely on? We depend on our phrases... Our task is to be in contact revel in and ideas to others. We must try continually to prolong the scope of our description, however in such a way that our messages don't thereby lose their function or unambiguous character ... We are suspended in language in such a means that we can not say what is up and what is down. The word "reality" is additionally a phrase, a phrase which we will have to be informed to use as it should be. Quoted in Philosophy of Science Vol. 37 (1934), p. 157, and in The Truth of Science : Physical Theories and Reality (1997) by way of Roger Gerhard Newton, p. 176For a parallel to the lesson of atomic theory in regards to the restricted applicability of such customary idealizations, we will have to in fact turn to slightly different branches of science, such as psychology, or even to that kind of epistemological issues of which already thinkers like Buddha and Lao Tzu were confronted, when attempting to harmonize our position as spectators and actors in the great drama of life. Speech on quantum idea at Celebrazione del Secondo Centenario della Nascita di Luigi Galvani, Bologna, Italy (October 1937)Contraria Sunt Complementa Opposites are complementary. However some distance the phenomena transcend the scope of classical bodily clarification, the account of all proof must be expressed in classical terms. The argument is that simply by the word "experiment" we refer to a scenario where we will be able to inform others what we now have achieved and what we have realized and that, subsequently, the account of the experimental arrangement and of the consequences of the observations will have to be expressed in unambiguous language with suitable software of the terminology of classical physics. Niels Bohr, "Discussions with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics," in Paul Arthur Schilpp, Albert Einstein: Philosopher Scientist (1949) pp. 199-241.An skilled is a one that has found out through his personal painful revel in all the errors that one could make in a very slim box. We are all agreed that your concept is loopy. The question that divides us is whether or not it is crazy enough to have a probability of being right kind. Said to Wolfgang Pauli after his presentation of Heisenberg's and Pauli's nonlinear field idea of fundamental debris, at Columbia University (1958), as reported via F. J. Dyson in his paper "Innovation in Physics" (Scientific American, 199, No. 3, September 1958, pp. 74-82; reprinted in "JingShin Theoretical Physics Symposium in Honor of Professor Ta-You Wu," edited through Jong-Ping Hsu & Leonardo Hsu, Singapore; River Edge, NJ: World Scientific, 1998, pp. 73-90, right here: p. 84). Your idea is crazy, however it's not crazy enough to be true. As quoted in First Philosophy: The Theory of Everything (2007) by means of Spencer Scoular, p. 89 There are many slight variants on this commentary: We are all agreed that your principle is crazy. The question which divides us is whether it is loopy sufficient. We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question is whether it is loopy sufficient to be have a chance of being proper. We in the back are satisfied your principle is crazy. But what divides us is whether or not it is loopy sufficient. Your concept is crazy, the question is whether it is crazy enough to be true. Yes, I think that your concept is loopy. Sadly, it isn't loopy sufficient to be believed.Physics is to be seemed not so much as the find out about of one thing a priori given, but fairly as the advance of strategies of ordering and surveying human enjoy. In this recognize our activity will have to be to account for such enjoy in a way unbiased of individual subjective judgement and subsequently function in the sense that it may be unambiguously communicated in unusual human language. "The Unity of Human Knowledge" (October 1960)Every treasured human being must be a radical and a rebel, for what he will have to goal at is to fix things than they are. As quoted in The World of the Atom (1966) through Henry Abraham Boorse and Lloyd Motz, p. 741How wonderful that we have got met with a paradox. Now we've some hope of making growth. As quoted in Niels Bohr : The Man, His Science, & the World They Changed (1966) by way of Ruth Moore, p. 196Two types of reality: profound truths identified by way of the fact that the opposite is additionally a profound reality, in contrast to trivialities the place opposites are patently absurd. As quoted by his son Hans Bohr in "My Father", revealed in Niels Bohr: His Life and Work (1967), p. 328 Unsourced variant: The opposite of a proper remark is a false remark. But the other of a profound fact may well be every other profound reality. As quoted in Max Delbrück, Mind from Matter: An Essay on Evolutionary Epistemology, (1986) p. 167. It is the hallmark of any deep reality that its negation is also a deep truthEvery sentence I utter must be understood no longer as an affirmation, however as a query. As quoted in A Dictionary of Scientific Quotations (1991) via Alan L. Mackay, p. 35It is a nice pity that human beings can't to find all of their delight in medical contemplativeness. As quoted in Chandra: A Biography of S. Chandrasekhar‎ (1991) by Kameshwar C. Wali, p. 147Anyone who is no longer surprised by way of quantum idea has not understood it. As quoted in Meeting the Universe Halfway (2007) by means of Karen Michelle Barad, p. 254, with a footnote bringing up The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr (1998). Variants: Those who don't seem to be stunned after they first come throughout quantum mechanics can not possibly have understood it. Those who don't seem to be stunned after they first come throughout quantum principle can not in all probability have understood it. Anyone who is no longer stunned by way of quantum concept has not understood a single phrase. If you think you can discuss quantum theory without feeling dizzy, you have not understood the very first thing about it.Some subjects are so serious that one can simplest joke about them. As quoted in The Genius of Science: A Portrait Gallery (2000) through Abraham Pais, p. 24 Some issues are so critical that one can most effective shaggy dog story about them. Variant without any citation as to author in Denial is no longer a river in Egypt (1998) by way of Sandi Bachom, p. 85.Truth and readability are complementary. As quoted in Quantum Theory and the Flight from Realism : Philosophical Responses to Quantum Mechanics (2000) by way of Christopher Norris, p. 234It is now not enough to be unsuitable, one must even be well mannered. As quoted in The Genius of Science: A Portrait Gallery (2000) by way of Abraham Pais, p. 24Never specific your self extra clearly than you might be able to assume. As quoted in Values of the Wise : Humanity's Highest Aspirations (2004) by Jason Merchey, p. 63Oh, what idiots all of us had been. This is simply as it will have to be. In reaction to Frisch & Meitner's explanation of nuclear fission, as quoted in The Physicists - A generation that modified the arena (1981) through C.P.Snow, p. 96I move into the Upanishads to ask questions. As quoted in God Is Not One : The Eight Rival Religions That Run the World and Why Their Differences Matter (2010), by way of Stephen Prothero, Ch, 4 : Hinduism : The Way of Devotion, p. 144No, no, you aren't considering, you're just being logical. In response to those that made purely formal or mathematical arguments, as quoted in What Little I Remember (1979) via Otto Robert Frisch, p. 95I am absolutely ready to communicate about the spiritual existence of an digital computer: to state that it is reflecting or is in a bad mood... The question whether or not the system actually feels or ponders, or whether or not it merely seems to be as although it did, is of path completely meaningingless. As quoted in a letter written from J. Kalckar to John A. Wheeler dated June 10, 1977, which appears in Wheeler's "Law Without Law," pg 207.[edit] The indisputable fact that religions through the ages have spoken in pictures, parables, and paradoxes way simply that there aren't any alternative ways of greedy the reality to which they refer. But that doesn't mean that it is now not a genuine fact. Nowadays, the individual turns out to be able to make a choice the spiritual framework of his ideas and movements fairly freely, and this freedom reflects the truth that the boundaries between the more than a few cultures and societies are beginning to become more fluid. But even if a person tries to reach the best imaginable level of independence, he'll still be swayed by means of the prevailing religious constructions — consciously or unconsciously. Statements of Bohr after the Solvay Conference of 1927, as quoted in Physics and Beyond (1971) via Werner HeisenbergI think very just like Dirac: the speculation of a non-public God is international to me. But we ought to remember the fact that religion makes use of language in relatively a other means from science. The language of religion is more carefully similar to the language of poetry than to the language of science. True, we're susceptible to suppose that science deals with information about goal details, and poetry with subjective feelings. Hence we conclude that if faith does certainly handle objective truths, it ought to undertake the same criteria of truth as science. But I actually find the department of the arena into an function and a subjective facet much too arbitrary. The fact that religions throughout the ages have spoken in photographs, parables, and paradoxes method simply that there are no different ways of greedy the reality to which they refer. But that doesn't imply that it is not a genuine fact. And splitting this truth into an objective and a subjective facet would possibly not get us very a long way.I imagine those traits in physics all the way through the ultimate decades that have shown how problematical such concepts as "objective" and "subjective" are, a great liberation of concept. The entire thing began with the theory of relativity. In the previous, the statement that two occasions are simultaneous used to be considered an purpose statement, one that could be communicated moderately merely and that was open to verification by way of any observer. Today we know that 'simultaneity' contains a subjective element, inasmuch as two occasions that appear simultaneous to an observer at rest don't seem to be essentially simultaneous to an observer in movement. However, the relativistic description is also objective inasmuch as each observer can deduce by calculation what the opposite observer will perceive or has perceived. For all that, we've got come a good distance from the classical ideal of purpose descriptions. In quantum mechanics the departure from this ideally suited has been much more radical. We can nonetheless use the objectifying language of classical physics to make statements about observable info. For instance, we will say that a photographic plate has been blackened, or that cloud droplets have shaped. But we will be able to say not anything in regards to the atoms themselves. And what predictions we base on such findings rely at the way we pose our experimental question, and right here the observer has freedom of choice. Naturally, it still makes no distinction whether or not the observer is a guy, an animal, or a piece of apparatus, but it surely is not conceivable to make predictions without reference to the observer or the approach of statement. To that extent, each bodily procedure may be mentioned to have function and subjective features. The purpose world of nineteenth-century science was, as we know these days, a great, limiting case, but now not the entire truth. Admittedly, even in our long run encounters with fact we will have to distinguish between the objective and the subjective facet, to make a division between the two. But the location of the separation might rely at the means issues are checked out; to a sure extent it may be chosen at will. Hence I will relatively understand why we can not discuss concerning the content of religion in an objectifying language. The fact that other religions take a look at to specific this content material in moderately distinct non secular bureaucracy is no actual objection. Perhaps we ought to glance upon those other bureaucracy as complementary descriptions which, despite the fact that they exclude one another, are needed to convey the rich possibilities flowing from guy's courting with the central order.In arithmetic we will take our interior distance from the content of our statements. In the overall research arithmetic is a mental sport that we can play or no longer play as we make a selection. Religion, alternatively, offers with ourselves, with our lifestyles and loss of life; its guarantees are supposed to govern our movements and thus, no less than not directly, our very lifestyles. We cannot simply look at them impassively from the out of doors. Moreover, our perspective to spiritual questions cannot be separated from our attitude to society. Even if religion arose because the religious construction of a explicit human society, it is arguable whether it has remained the strongest social molding drive thru history, or whether or not society, once formed, develops new religious constructions and adapts them to its specific stage of wisdom. Nowadays, the individual seems to be able to make a choice the non secular framework of his ideas and movements reasonably freely, and this freedom displays the fact that the limits between the more than a few cultures and societies are starting to become more fluid. But even if a person tries to reach the best imaginable stage of independence, he will nonetheless be swayed by way of the present spiritual buildings — consciously or unconsciously. For he, too, should be able to speak of existence and loss of life and the human situation to different individuals of the society in which he's chosen to reside; he must train his kids in accordance to the norms of that society, are compatible into its existence. Epistemological sophistries can't possibly help him attain these ends. Here, too, the connection between crucial idea in regards to the non secular content material of a given religion and motion in accordance with the planned acceptance of that content is complementary. And such acceptance, if consciously arrived at, fills the individual with strength of objective, helps him to triumph over doubts and, if he has to endure, supplies him with the sort of solace that only a sense of being sheltered beneath an all-embracing roof can grant. In that sense, religion helps to make social lifestyles extra harmonious; its most important job is to remind us, in the language of pictures and parables, of the wider framework inside which our existence is set.

Disputed[edit]

Stop telling God what to do with his cube. Anyone who is no longer surprised via quantum concept has now not understood it. Heisenberg recounts a personal conversation he had with Pauli and Bohr in 1952 in which Bohr says, "Those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it." Heisenberg, Werner, Physics and Beyond. (New York: Harper & Row, 1971) p. 206. Bohr said this sentence in a conversation with Werner Heisenberg, as quoted in: "Der Teil und das Ganze. Gespräche im Umkreis der Atomphysik" . R. Piper & Co., München, 1969, S. 280. DIE ZEIT 22. Aug. 1969 [1]. As quoted in Meeting the Universe Halfway (2007) by way of Karen Michelle Barad, p. 254, with the quote attributed to The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr, but without a web page quantity or volume number given.

David Mermin, on pages 186–187 of his book Boojums All the Way Through: Communicating Science in a Prosaic Age (1990) noted that he in particular looked for pithy quotes about quantum mechanics along those traces when reviewing the 3 volumes of The Philosophical Writings of Niels Bohr, however couldn't in finding any:

Once I tried to train some quantum mechanics to a magnificence of regulation students, philosophers, and art historians. As an commercial for the direction I put together probably the most sensational quotations I could acquire from the most authoritative practitioners of the topic. Heisenberg was once a goldmine: "The concept of the objective reality of the elementary particles has thus evaporated..."; "the idea of an objective real world whose smallest parts exist objectively in the same sense as stones or trees exist, independently of whether or not we observe them ... is impossible ..." Feynman did his section too: "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." But I failed to flip up anything else comparable in the writings of Bohr. Others attributed impressive remarks to him, but he appeared to take pains to keep away from any hint of the dramatic in his personal writings. You don't pack them into your lecture room with "The indivisibility of quantum phenomena finds its consequent expression in the circumstance that every definable subdivision would require a change of the experimental arrangement with the appearance of new individual phenomena," or "the wider frame of complementarity directly expresses our position as regards the account of fundamental properties of matter presupposed in classical physical description but outside its scope."

I was subsequently searching for nuggets after I sat down to evaluation those 3 volumes – a reissue of Bohr's collected essays at the revolutionary epistemological personality of the quantum concept and on the implications of that revolution for different scientific and non-scientific areas of endeavor (the originals first appeared in 1934, 1958, and 1963.) But essentially the most radical remark I may just to find in all three books was this: "...physics is to be regarded not so much as the study of something a priori given, but rather as the development of methods for ordering and surveying human experience." No nuggets for the nonscientist.

Variants: Those who aren't surprised once they first come across quantum mechanics can't most likely have understood it. Those who don't seem to be surprised once they first come across quantum principle can't possibly have understood it. Anyone who is now not stunned by way of quantum concept has no longer understood a single phrase. If you assume you'll discuss quantum theory without feeling dizzy, you have not understood the very first thing about it.Prediction is very difficult, especially in regards to the long run. As quoted in Teaching and Learning Elementary Social Studies (1970) by way of Arthur Okay. Ellis, p. 431 The above quote is also attributed to various humourists and the Danish poet Piet Hein: "det er svært at spå – især om fremtiden" It is additionally attributed to Danish cartoonist Storm P (Robert Storm Petersen). Variant: It's onerous to make predictions, particularly about the long run.Stop telling God what to do with his dice. A response to Einstein's assertion that "God doesn't play dice"; a an identical statement is attributed to Enrico Fermi Variant: Einstein, don't tell God what to do. Variant: Don't tell God what to do with his cube. Variant: You ought no longer to talk for what Providence can or cannot do. – As described in The Physicists: A era that modified the world (1981) by C. P. Snow, p. 84Of path now not ... but I'm advised it really works despite the fact that you do not imagine in it. Reply to a visitor to his home in Tisvilde who asked him if he actually believed a horseshoe above his door brought him success, as quoted in Inward Bound : Of Matter and Forces in the Physical World (1986) by Abraham Pais, p. 210 In most printed accounts of this anecdote such was Bohr's reply to his pal, but in one early account, in The Interaction Between Science and Philosophy (1974) by way of Samuel Sambursky, p. 357, Bohr was at a buddy's area and asked "Do you really believe in this?" to which his good friend spoke back "Oh, I don't believe in it. But I am told it works even if you don't believe in it." Variant: No, but I'm advised it works even though you don't imagine in it.

Quotes about Bohr[edit]

Alphabetized through author Bohr appeared to assume that he had solved this query. I may not in finding his solution in his writings. But there used to be surely that he was once convinced that he had solved the issue and, in so doing, had not simplest contributed to atomic physics, but to epistemology, to philosophy, to humanity in general. And there are astonishing passages in his writings in which he is sort of patronizing to the traditional Far Eastern philosophers, almost pronouncing that he had solved the problems that had defeated them. It's an extraordinary factor for me—the character of Bohr—completely puzzling. I really like to discuss of two Bohrs: one is a very pragmatic fellow who insists that the apparatus is classical, and the other is a very smug, pontificating man who makes enormous claims for what he has finished. One of the favorite maxims of my father used to be the honor between the two varieties of truths, profound truths known through the fact that the other is also a profound truth, in distinction to trivia the place opposites are obviously absurd. Hans Henrik Bohr, writing about his father in "My father" in Niels Bohr - His Life and Work As Seen By His Friends and Colleagues (1967), S. Rozental, ed.If quantum idea has any philosophical importance at all, it lies in the fact that it demonstrates for a unmarried, sharply outlined science the necessity of twin sides and complementary considerations. Niels Bohr has mentioned this question with respect to many applications in physiology, psychology, and philosophy in basic. Not ceaselessly in lifestyles has a human being brought about me such pleasure via his mere presence as you probably did. It is practically unattainable to describe Niels Bohr to a one that has never labored with him. Probably his maximum feature assets was once the slowness of his considering and comprehension. When, in the late twenties and early thirties, the writer of this ebook was one of the "Bohr boys" operating in his Institute in Copenhagen on a Carlsberg (the best beer in the arena!) fellowship, he had many a probability to apply it. In the night time, when a handful of Bohr's students had been "working" in the Paa Blegdamsvejen Institute, discussing the most recent issues of the quantum concept, or enjoying Ping-pong at the library desk with espresso cups put on it to make the game more difficult, Bohr would seem, complaining that he was once very tired, and would really like to "do something." To "do something" inevitably supposed to pass to the movies, and the one motion pictures Bohr favored were those referred to as The Gun Fight on the Lazy Gee Ranch or The Lone Ranger and a Sioux Girl. But it was once laborious to cross with Bohr to the flicks. He may not apply the plot, and was once repeatedly asking us, to the great annoyance of the remaining of the audience, questions like this: "Is that the sister of that cowboy who shot the Indian who tried to steal a herd of cattle belonging to her brother-in-law?" The similar slowness of reaction used to be apparent at clinical meetings. Many a time, a visiting young physicist (most physicists visiting Copenhagen have been young) would deliver a sensible talk about his fresh calculations on some intricate downside of the quantum idea. Everybody in the audience would perceive the argument moderately clearly, however Bohr would not. So everybody would start to provide an explanation for to Bohr the straightforward level he had neglected, and in the resulting turmoil everyone would stop working out the rest. Finally, after a substantial period of time, Bohr would begin to understand, and it would turn out that what he understood about the problem presented by means of the visitor was once fairly other from what the visitor meant, and used to be proper, whilst the customer's interpretation used to be wrong. George Gamow on Niels Bohr in "The Great Physicists from Galileo to Einstein" (1961) pg. 237I consider discussions with Bohr which went thru many hours until very late at evening and ended virtually in depression; and when on the end of the dialogue I went on my own for a stroll in the neighbouring park I repeated to myself over and over again the question: Can nature perhaps be so absurd because it gave the impression to us in these atomic experiments? The first thing Bohr stated to me was that it will best then be successful to paintings with him if I understood that he was a dilettante. The best approach I knew to react to this unexpected commentary was with a polite smile of disbelief. But evidently Bohr used to be critical. He explained how he had to approach every new question from a place to begin of total lack of awareness. It is most likely better to say that Bohr's power lay in his bold intuition and perception moderately than erudition. Abraham Pais, in testimony in Niels Bohr : His Life and Work as Seen by way of His Friends and Colleagues (1967) edited by Stefan Rozental, p. 218; later in his personal work, Niels Bohr's Times : In Physics, Philosophy, and Polity (1991)When asked whether or not the algorism of quantum mechanics could be regarded as as come what may mirroring an underlying quantum world, Bohr would answer, "There is no quantum world. There is only an abstract quantum physical description. It is wrong to think that the task of physics is to find out how nature is. Physics concerns what we can say about nature." Bohr felt that every step in the development of physics has bolstered the view that the problem of setting up an unambiguous description of nature has just one answer. He regarded all makes an attempt to exchange our fundamental concepts or to introduce a new common sense to account for the peculiarities of quantum phenomena as not simply pointless but in addition incompatible with our most elementary stipulations, since we're suspended in a unique language. Aage Petersen, "The philosophy of Niels Bohr" through in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Vol. 19, No. 7 (September 1963); The Genius of Science: A Portrait Gallery (2000) by way of Abraham Pais, p. 24, and Niels Bohr: Reflections on Subject and Object (2001) via Paul. McEvoy, p. 291 Quotes about quote: To my nice pleasure, Victor Weisskopf used to be sitting in his same old position in the entrance row, smiling approvingly up at me. (It's unexpected how much such encouragement from such a source can give a boost to the quality of a talk.) His smiles persevered right up to the instant when I learn the Petersen citation. No sooner had I ended studying it than Viki was once on his ft. "That's outrageous," he proclaimed. "Bohr couldn't possibly have said anything like that!" Somewhat stunned by means of this surprising turn from approbation to condemnation, I feebly protested that I wasn't attributing it to Bohr, simply to Aage Petersen's reminiscence of Bohr. That didn't extinguish the flames. "Shame on Aage Petersen," declared Viki, "for putting those ridiculous words into Bohr's mouth!" [Bohr used to be] a marvelous physicist, one of the greatest of all time, however he used to be a depressing thinker, and one could not communicate to him. He was talking all the time, permitting nearly just one or two phrases to you and then immediately slicing in. "You can talk about people like Buddha, Jesus, Moses, Confucius, but the thing that convinced me that such people existed were the conversations with Bohr," Dr. Wheeler said. Niels Bohr distinguished two kinds of truths. An unusual reality is a statement whose opposite is a falsehood. A profound fact is a observation whose reverse is also a profound truth.