Most people want the explanations (models) to make intuitive sense, though a few are satisfied with the underlying math only. And intuition is based on what we already know and feel.
The Pauli exclusion (or inclusion, if you take bosons) principle feels to me like rubbery wave-functions pushing against each other (or sticking together), even though I understand that antisymmetrization is not actually a microscopic force, and interacting electrons are not actually separate entities.
I do not think that one should lump free will and identity in the same category as basic QM, however, as we do not have nearly the degree of understanding of the cognitive processes in System 1 which produce the feeling of either.
The Pauli exclusion (or inclusion, if you take bosons) principle feels to me like rubbery wave-functions pushing against each other (or sticking together), even though I understand that antisymmetrization is not actually a microscopic force, and interacting electrons are not actually separate entities.
I feel like that’s extremely misleading. The Pauli exclusion principle is not a force, and cannot cause a particle to accelerate.
I feel like that’s extremely misleading. The Pauli exclusion principle is not a force, and cannot cause a particle to accelerate.
So… you repeated what I wrote (“antisymmetrization is not actually a microscopic force”) and then call what I said “extremely misleading”? Have a downvote.
Most people want the explanations (models) to make intuitive sense, though a few are satisfied with the underlying math only. And intuition is based on what we already know and feel.
The Pauli exclusion (or inclusion, if you take bosons) principle feels to me like rubbery wave-functions pushing against each other (or sticking together), even though I understand that antisymmetrization is not actually a microscopic force, and interacting electrons are not actually separate entities.
I do not think that one should lump free will and identity in the same category as basic QM, however, as we do not have nearly the degree of understanding of the cognitive processes in System 1 which produce the feeling of either.
I feel like that’s extremely misleading. The Pauli exclusion principle is not a force, and cannot cause a particle to accelerate.
So… you repeated what I wrote (“antisymmetrization is not actually a microscopic force”) and then call what I said “extremely misleading”? Have a downvote.