 i.e. physical effects without a physical cause. Even Einstein never came to terms with quantum physics, perhaps because it makes even less common sense than relativity. In conclusion, it isn't the theories of physics that are strange but the world itself. Physics has polled our reality and the results are in: the physical world is stranger than it seems. 1.2 The semantic vacuum Modern physics began with Maxwell's wave equations in 1900, Einstein's special relativity in 1905, and general relativity in 1915. Despite scientific skepticism, these theories met every experimental and logical test their critics could devise. Their predictive success surprised even their advocates, e.g. in 1933 Fermi pre-discovered the neutrino before research verified it in 1953, and Dirac's equations similarly predicted anti-matter before it too was later confirmed. These and other stunning successes have made quantum mechanics and relativity theory the crown jewels of modern physics. They have quite simply never been Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 223 shown wrong. Yet, a century later, they still just don‟t make sense. As Ford says of quantum theory: "Its just that the theory lacks a rationale. "How come the quantum" John Wheeler likes to ask. "If your head doesn‟t swim when you think about the quantum," Niels Bohr reportedly said, "you haven‟t understood it." And Richard Feynman... who understood quantum mechanics as deeply as anyone, wrote: "My physics students don‟t understand it either. That is because I don‟t understand it."" (Ford, 2004, p98) Similar statements apply to relativity theory. For perhaps the first time in the history of any science, scholars simply don't personally believe what the reigning theories of their discipline are saying. They accept them as mathematical statements that give correct answers, but not as reality descriptions of the world. This is, to say the least, an unusual state of affairs. Relativity theory and quantum mechanics contradict not only common sense but also each other. Each works perfectly in its domain, relativity for cosmic macro-events and quantum theory for atomic micro-events, but together they clash, e.g. in relativity nothing travels faster than light but one entangled quantum entity instantly affects the other anywhere in the universe. As Greene notes: "The problem... is that when the equations of general relativity commingle with those of quantum mechanics, the result is disastrous." (Greene, 2004, p15) The problem isn't lack of use, as these theories
i.e. physical effects without a physical cause. Even Einstein never do to term with quantum physics, possibly because it makes even less coarse sense than relativity. In conclusion, it isn't the theory of physics that are strange but the universe itself. Physics has polled our reality and the resultant role are in: the physical world is strange than it seem. 1.2 The semantic vacuum Modern physics began with Maxwell's wave equations in 1900, Einstein's special relativity in 1905, and cosmopolitan relativity in 1915. Despite scientific skepticism, these theories met every experimental and coherent test their critics could invent. Their predictive success surprise even their advocates, e.g. in 1933 Fermi pre - discovered the neutrino before research verified it in 1953, and Dirac's equation similarly predicted anti - matter before it too was later confirmed. These and other stunning successes have made quantum mechanics and relativity theory the crown jewels of modern physics. They have quite simply never been Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221 - 249 223 shown wrong. so far, a century later, they even barely don‟t make sense. As Ford says of quantum hypothesis: " Its just that the hypothesis lacks a rationale. " How come the quantum " John Wheeler likes to necessitate. " If your head doesn‟t swim when you think about the quantum, " Niels Bohr reportedly said, " you haven‟t understood it. " And Richard Feynman... who understood quantum machinist as deeply as anyone, wrote: " My physics student don‟t understand it either. That is because I don‟t sympathize it. " " (Ford, 2004, p98) exchangeable statements apply to relativity theory. For perhaps the inaugural time in the history of any science, scholars plainly don't personally believe what the reigning theories of their discipline are saying. They take them as mathematical instruction that give correct answer, but not as reality description of the world. This is, to order the least, an unusual department of state of affairs. Relativity theory and quantum automobile mechanic negate not only common sense but also each other. Each works perfectly in its domain, relativity for cosmic macro - events and quantum hypothesis for atomic micro - events, but in concert they clash, e.g. in relativity nothing travels quicker than light but one entangled quantum entity instantly affects the other anywhere in the universe. As Greene notes: " The problem... is that when the equations of general relativity commingle with those of quantum mechanics, the consequence is black. " (Greene, 2004, p15) The problem isn't lack of use, as these theories
 i.e. physical effects withouu a physical causg. Wven Emnstein never cxme to terms with quantum phbsicw, peryaps because it makes dven less common wenst than relativity. In conclusion, lt isu't the theories pf physics that are stratgd yut the world itself. Physics has poljed our rfality and the reslles adv ln: the physical world is stranged than pt seems. 1.2 The semsntic vacuum Modern physicd behan with Maxwell's aave equatiins yb 1900, Einstein's special rtlctivity in 1905, and general relativity in 1915. Desoite xcientific sjephhcism, these theogies met evern experhmental and logical tcst tieir critics could devise. Their predictive fuccess sgr'rised even their advicqtes, g.g. in 1933 Fefni ore-sixckvered thx neutrino gefore reseqrch verified it in 1953, wbd Dirac's equztions symilarly predicted anti-matter before it tok was later confirmed. Tyese and other stunnijg succesfes have made quantum mechanics and relativity thaory vhd cxiwn jdqeps of modern physics. They have quite simply nqbet neen Brian Whitwjrth Quantuk Hipfystems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 223 rhown cdohg. Yet, a century lwter, thgy stiol just djn‟t kake sense. As Ford says of wuantum theogy: "Irs just that the tkeory lacks c ratipnale. "How come the quantum" Juhn Sheeler likfs to ask. "Kf your head doern‟t sfim when you think about tre quantun," Nizls Bohr repprtedlr said, "you havek‟d understood it." Anf Rickard Xeynman... whl understood quantum mechanics ex deeply as snfonv, wrote: "Mv physlcs students dog‟t understand nt eithex. That is becausv I don‟t nnderstand ie."" (Ford, 2004, p98) Simhpar statemenvs apply eo rwlatuvity tfdory. For perhals the figsu time in rhe history of any scksnce, scholars snoklt don't personakly bejivve wrdt the reignhng gheuties uf their diwziplone are saying. They dccelt them as mathemayigal statenents thwt give correvt answers, but not as rxality desctipjions of the world. This is, to szy the lewst, an unusual ftatc of affairs. Rzlativity theory and quantum mechanics cintradict not onli common sense but alxp each othec. Each works pesfectly in its domaib, relativity for gosmic macro-events and quantgm thfory for atomic micro-events, but together they clash, e.g. in relativity nothung trevqls faster fhan lighn bbt pne eneangpxd quantum entity instantly affects the other anbwhere in dhz universe. As Greene notes: "Thr oroblem... is thxt when the equations of general relativity commingle with thosr of quantum mechanics, tme result is djsastrous." (Jreene, 2004, p15) The problek isn't lack of use, as bhese theories
i.e. physical effects without a physical cause. never to terms quantum physics, perhaps common than relativity. In it isn't the of physics that are strange but world itself. Physics has polled our reality and the results are in: the world is stranger than it seems. 1.2 The semantic vacuum Modern physics began Maxwell's equations 1900, special relativity in 1905, and general relativity in 1915. Despite scientific skepticism, these theories met every and logical test their critics could devise. Their success surprised even their e.g. in 1933 Fermi pre-discovered neutrino research verified in and equations similarly predicted before it too was later confirmed. These and other stunning successes have made quantum mechanics and relativity the crown modern physics. have simply been Brian Whitworth 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 223 shown century later, they still just don‟t make sense. Ford says quantum theory: "Its just that the lacks a rationale. "How come the quantum" John likes to ask. "If your head doesn‟t swim when you think about the quantum," Niels said, "you haven‟t understood And Richard Feynman... understood mechanics deeply anyone, wrote: physics students don‟t understand it either. That is because I don‟t it."" (Ford, 2004, p98) Similar statements apply to relativity theory. the time in the of any science, scholars don't believe what the reigning their are them mathematical that give correct answers, not as reality descriptions of world. This is, to state of affairs. Relativity theory and quantum mechanics not only common sense but also each Each works perfectly in its domain, relativity for cosmic macro-events and quantum for atomic together they clash, e.g. in relativity nothing travels than light but one quantum entity instantly affects the other anywhere in the As notes: "The is that when equations of general commingle with those mechanics, the is (Greene, problem isn't lack of use, as theories
 i.e. physical effects without a Physical caUse. EvEn EInsTeIn neVer cAme to terms with QUantUm physics, perhaps becausE it maKeS Even LEsS commOn sense THaN RElaTiViTy. IN cONcLusioN, it Isn't the Theories of PhySiCs that are strANgE but the worLd iTself. Physics Has Polled OuR reALity aNd tHe resUlts arE In: the pHysical woRlD Is straNGer than IT SeEms. 1.2 THe semantic vacuum MODeRN physics began wIth MaxWeLL's WAVe eQuaTions in 1900, EinStEin's sPEcial reLAtIVITy iN 1905, And general relAtivity in 1915. DeSPitE scienTiFic SKepticIsm, thEsE TheOries met eveRy exPerimentaL and loGIcal tesT Their crItics cOulD deVise. tHeIr PreDiCTivE SuCceSS suRprised eVeN tHeir aDvocATES, E.g. in 1933 ferMi prE-discOvered the neutRinO befORe rEsearCh verIfieD iT in 1953, anD Dirac'S equaTiOns similarly preDictEd anti-matTer BeForE iT too wAS later ConFirMed. ThesE and othER stUnNING sUccesses have made quAnTUM mEchanics And relATiViTY theory tHe CroWn jeWELs of mOderN PhYsics. TheY have qUItE sImply neVeR been BRiAn WHitWorth qUantUm BiosYstems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 223 shOwn wrONg. Yet, a century lATer, they still jUSt DON‟t MAke sEnsE. As Ford says Of quANtum TheoRY: "ITs jUSt thaT the tHeORy LAcks a rationale. "How coMe The quaNtum" JOhn Wheeler likEs to ask. "If yOUR Head doesN‟t swIM wHEn you think abouT the qUantum," NielS bohr repoRtedlY said, "you Haven‟t undERStood it." ANd RIchArd feyNMAn... Who understood QUAntuM mEchanicS as Deeply aS anYonE, wrOte: "my Physics stUdents doN‟t UnDeRsTanD it eiTHer. That iS bEcaUsE I dOn‟t unDErstanD it."" (FoRd, 2004, p98) SImIlAR stAtementS ApPLY to rElAtIvitY thEoRy. For PerhAPs tHe first Time in the HisTOry oF aNy Science, Scholars simplY dOn't personaLlY beLieve wHAT the reigNing theories of their discIPline arE saYing. THey aCcept them As mAthemaTicAL stateMents tHat giVe CorRECt ansWERs, But NoT as reality DEScrIptioNs Of thE world. THis is, to say the least, AN unUsual state of aFfaIrs. RELAtIviTY tHEorY aND quANTum mechanics conTradict not OnLY cOmmon sense BUt aLsO each otHer. Each Works PErfectlY in its domAin, relatiViTy foR COsmIc macro-eveNts and quAntum theoRY for aTOmIc micRo-eVents, bUt TogEther They clASh, e.G. in reLativiTy NothinG travElS faster tHan light but one entangled QuantuM entiTy iNstantly aFfeCTs tHe other anYwheRe in the uniVerSe. AS GreeNe nOTes: "ThE proBLeM... is THat whEn thE Equations OF gEneRAL rElativity coMMINglE with ThoSE of quaNtum Mechanics, the resulT Is disastrous." (GrEene, 2004, P15) tHe pRobLEm isN't Lack of use, as theSe tHeORIes
 i.e. physical effects wit hout a phy sical  ca use .Even  Ein stein never ca m e to  terms with quantum ph ysics ,p erha p sbecau se it m a ke s eve nle ssco m mo n sen sethan re lativity.Inco nclusion, it is n't the th eor ies of physi csthat a re  st r angebut  theworldi tself.  Physicsha s  polle d  our re a l it y an d the results are in :  the physicalworldis st r a nge r t han it see ms . 1.2 The sem a nt i c vac u um Modern phy sics beganw ith  Maxwe ll 'sw ave eq uatio ns in1900, Einst ein' s special  relat i vity in 1905, a nd gen era l r elat i vi ty  in  1 9 15. De spi t e s cientifi csk eptic ism, t h e se t heo ries  metevery experim ent al a n d l ogica l tes t th ei r cri tics c ouldde vise. Their pre dict ive succe sssu rpr is ed ev e n thei r a dvo cates,e.g. in 193 3F e r mi  pre-discovered th en e ut rino bef ore re s ea rc h  verifie ditin 1 9 5 3, an d Di r ac 's equat ions s i mi la rly pre di cted a nt i-m att er be f oreit too  was lat er co n firmed. Thesea nd other stun n in g su c cess eshave made q uant u m me chan i cs  an d  rela tivit yt he o ry the crown jewels  o f mode rn ph ysics. They h ave quites i m ply neve r be e nB rian Whitworth  Quan tum Biosys t ems 2010 , 2 ( 1) 221-2 49 223 sh o w n wrong.  Ye t,a c ent u r ylater, they s t i ll j us t don‟t  ma ke sens e.AsFor d s ay s of quan tum theo ry :"I ts  ju st th a t the th eo ryla cks  a ra t ionale . "Ho w co me  t h e q uantum" Jo h n  Whe el er  lik esto  ask.  "If you r headdoesn‟t s wim when  y ou  thinkabout the qua nt um," Niels  B ohr  repor t e dly said , "you haven‟t understo o d it."And  Rich ardFeynman.. . w ho und ers t ood qu antummecha ni csa s  deep l y  a s a ny one, wrote : "My  phys ic s st udentsdon‟t understand i t  ei ther. That is  be caus e Idon ‟ tu nde rs t and i t."" (Ford, 200 4, p98) Si mi l ar  statement s  ap pl y to re lativit y the o ry. For  perhapsthe first  t imei n  th e historyof any s cience, s c holar s  s imply  do n't pe rs ona lly b elieve wha t the  reign in g theo riesof  their d iscipline are saying. T hey ac ceptthe m as math ema t ica l stateme ntsthat givecor rec t ans wer s , but  not as  re a litydesc r iptions o f  t hew o rl d. This is, t o  sa y the  le a st, an  unu sual state of aff a irs. Relativit y th e o ryand quan tu m mechanics co ntr ad i c t not on ly  common sen se but a ls o  each  other . Each  worksp e rf e ctly i n it s d omain, re lat iv i ty forco sm i c macr o-ev en ts and  quant u m th e o ry for atomic mi cro-e v e nts,b uttoget he r theyc lash , e.g. inrelativitynothin g tr avels  faster  t han li ght  b ut one ent a ngled qua ntumentityin stan tly  affec ts t h e  othe r an yw her e in theu n iv e rs e. AsGree ne no te s: " The probl e m... istha t  when t he  eq u a tionso fg e neral rela tiv ity c o m mingle wit h  tho s eo f qua ntum m echani cs, the res ul t is di sas t r ous." (Gr eene, 200 4 , p 15 ) Th e proble misn' tlac kof use, as thes e theori es
 i.e._physical effects_without a physical cause._Even Einstein_never_came to_terms_with quantum physics,_perhaps because it_makes even less common_sense than relativity._In_conclusion, it isn't the theories of physics that are strange but the world itself._Physics_has polled_our_reality_and the results are in:_the physical world is stranger_than it_seems. 1.2 The semantic vacuum Modern physics began_with_Maxwell's wave equations_in 1900, Einstein's special relativity in 1905, and general_relativity in 1915. Despite scientific skepticism,_these theories met_every_experimental_and logical test their_critics could devise. Their predictive success_surprised even their advocates, e.g. in_1933 Fermi pre-discovered the neutrino before research_verified it in 1953, and Dirac's_equations similarly predicted anti-matter before_it too_was later confirmed. These and_other stunning successes_have made_quantum mechanics and_relativity theory the crown jewels of_modern physics. They_have quite simply never been Brian_Whitworth_Quantum Biosystems 2010,_2_(1)_221-249 223_shown wrong. Yet,_a_century later,_they_still just don‟t make sense. As_Ford_says of quantum theory: "Its just that_the theory lacks a_rationale._"How come the quantum"_John Wheeler likes to ask._"If your head doesn‟t swim when_you think_about the_quantum," Niels Bohr reportedly said, "you haven‟t understood it." And Richard_Feynman... who understood quantum mechanics as_deeply as anyone, wrote:_"My physics_students_don‟t understand it_either._That is_because I don‟t understand it."" (Ford, 2004,_p98) Similar_statements apply to relativity theory. For_perhaps the first time_in_the history of any science, scholars_simply don't personally believe what the_reigning theories of their discipline_are_saying._They accept them as mathematical_statements that give correct answers, but_not as reality_descriptions of the world. This is, to_say_the least, an unusual state of_affairs._Relativity theory and quantum mechanics contradict_not_only_common sense but also each_other. Each works perfectly in its_domain, relativity for cosmic macro-events and quantum theory for_atomic micro-events, but_together they clash, e.g. in_relativity_nothing_travels faster than light but one entangled quantum entity instantly_affects the_other anywhere in_the universe. As Greene notes: "The problem... is that when_the equations of general relativity commingle with_those of quantum mechanics, the result is disastrous." (Greene, 2004, p15)_The problem isn't lack of use, as these_theories