Because of its oddities, many ps disliked quantum t least certain aspectsof it, and none more so tein. ttle ironic since it imes like ion at t of tum tely, but like it. “God doesn’t play dice,” he said.
4Einstein couldn’t bear tion t God could create a universe in a distance—t one particle couldinstantaneously influence anotrillions of miles aark violation of tivity. t notrace t andyet s insisting t, some tomic level, information could.
(No one, incidentally, icles ac. Scientists o t Yakir A tit.”)Above all, t quantum produced a level of untidiness t previously existed. Suddenly you needed ts of lao explain tum tivity for ty of relativity t at explaining ed suns or o cluster, but turned out to all at ticle level. to explain atoms togetrong nuclear force and rong forcebinds atoms toget’s ons to bed doogetasks, mostly to do rolling tes of certainsorts of radioactive decay.
te its name, is ten billion billion billion times stronger ty, and trong nuclear force is more poill—vastly so, in fact—but tends to only tiniest distances. trong force reac only toabout 1/100,000 of ter of an atom. t’s edand dense and end to be so unstable: trong forcejust can’t o all tons.
t of all t p large—leading quite separate lives. Einstein dislikedt, too. ed t of o searco tie up time to time , butit alle pitied. Almost exception, e Snoill t ed the second half of his life.”
4Or at least t is is nearly alual quote seems o sneak a look atGod’s cards. But t elepat I cannot believe for asingle moment.”
Elses om at an extremely profound level—as too effectively demonstrated in August 1945 by exploding a pair of atomic bombs over Japan.
By t ps could be excused for t t about conqueredtom. In fact, everyticle p to get a ed. But before ake up t sliging story, bring anotrao date by considering an important and salutary tale of avarice, deceit,bad science, several needless deatermination of th.