什么是真实？
What is real?
Adam Becker · 初版 2018 年
6人推荐
10位读者提及
10次提及
为什么值得读
- 从社会学视角审视哥本哈根诠释为何长期主导
- 刻画物理学家的个性及科学哲学的演进过程
- 详细梳理德布罗意-玻姆力学等替代理论
“量子力学是人类最伟大的科学成就。它解释了太阳为何发光以及你的眼睛为何能看见东西。它是你手机中 LED 和太空探测器核动力核心背后的理论。每一位物理学家都认同量子物理学取得了惊人的成功。但若问他们量子物理究竟意味着什么，结果必然是一场争吵。争论的焦点是宇宙本身的本质。某样东西具有‘真实性’意味着什么？意识在宇宙中扮演着什么角色？量子法则是否只适用于像电子和质子这样微小的物体，而不适用于我们？在 What is Real? 中，Ad……”
Hacker News 上怎么说
正在加载完整评论……
亚当·贝克尔的《什么是真实的？》（What is real?）。如果你对广义相对论特别感兴趣，它并没怎么涉及，但这本书读起来很棒，能让你对“现代”科学的运作方式有所了解（我是说在……之前）
"What is real?" by Adam Becker. It doesn't touch much on general relativity if you are interested specifically in that, but it's a great read and gives you a bit of perspective how "modern" science works (I mean before…
……完全没有理由去怀疑导波诠释或玻姆力学。如果想看一本通俗一些、深入探讨相关物理学家性格特点的书，我也推荐亚当·贝克尔的《什么是真实的？：量子物理意义的未竟探索》（What Is Real?: The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics）。这两本书我都是通过 https://bohmian-mechanics.net 上的书单了解到的。
…there is no reason to doubt the pilot wave interpretation, or Bohmian mechanics. For a more popular account that delves into the personalities of the physicists involved, I also recommend Adam Becker’s “What Is Real?: The Unfinished Quest for the Meaning of Quantum Physics”. Both books came to me via the reading list at https://bohmian-mechanics.net.
我是通过亚当·贝克尔那本极好的书《什么是真实的？》（What is Real）了解到玻姆的。那是我接触到的最早倡导科学哲学的书籍之一，非常引人入胜。友情提醒：如果你是玻尔和哥本哈根诠释的死忠粉……
I found a Bohm through the excellent book What is Real by Adam Becker. It was one of the first books that advocated the philosophy of science that I’d encountered, and it was fascinating. Warning: If you’re a huge fan of Bohr and the Copenhagen interpretation…
亚当·贝克尔的《什么是真实的？》（What is Real）。他从社会学角度阐述了哥本哈根诠释为何能延续这么久，尽管它早期遭到了强烈反对，而且冯·诺依曼关于它为何必然正确的论证也被驳斥了。……
"What is Real" by Adam Becker. He presents the sociology of why the Copenhagen interpretation persisted for so long, despite strong opposition early on and refutations of Von Neumann's work on why it had to be true.…
……该诠释最初被埃弗里特的博士导师约翰·惠勒在尼尔斯·玻尔的影响下给否决了，但我从未在任何地方读到过他们两人的动机带有任何宗教色彩。亚当·贝克尔的《什么是真实的？》（What is Real?）一书对这段历史有很好的记述。
…interpretation was initially rejected by John Wheeler, Everett's Ph.D. advisor, under the influence of Neils Bohr, but I've never read anywhere that the motivation of the two was in any way religious. The book What is Real? by Adam Becker has a good account of this history.
……这篇论文界定了主观体验的感受与自诩独立于该体验之外的“超然”理性科学描述视角之间的区别与张力。亚当·贝克尔的《什么是真实的？》（What is Real）对（某些）现代科学哲学中为何也是如此进行了有趣的探讨——当我们谈论世界时，总有一种声音想说那里其实根本没有“实体”存在，只是一堆东西。我……
…this paper frames the distinction and tension between the feeling of subjective experience and the "detached" rational scientific descriptive perspective that purports to be outside of that experience. What is Real by Adam Becker was a fun foray into why this is so in (some) modern science philosophy as well - there's some desire to say that there isn't a "there" there when we talk about the world, just stuff. I'm…