 permeate modern physics applications, from micro-computers to space exploration. By some estimates over 40% of US productivity derives from technologies based on quantum theory, including cell phones, transistors, lasers, CD players and computers. Physicists use quantum theory because it works, not because it makes sense: "... physicists who work with the theory every day don‟t really know quite what to make of it. They fill blackboards with quantum calculations and acknowledge that it is probably the most powerful, accurate, and predictive scientific theory ever developed. But... the very suggestion that it may be literally true as a description of nature is still greeted with cynicism, incomprehension, and even anger." (Vacca, 2005, p. 116) We have precision, proofs and applications, but not understanding. We know the mathematics exactly, but can't connect it to our experience of the world, e.g. Feynman's "sum over histories" method calculates quantum outcomes by assuming electrons simultaneously take all possible paths between two points, but how can a basic physical entity like an electron travel all possible paths between two points at the same time? While most theories increase understanding, such theories seem to take it away. Despite a century of validation, neither relativity or quantum mechanics concepts are taught in high schools today, not because of their complexity, but because the emperor of modern physics has no semantic clothes. Who can teach the unbelievable? Physics has quarantined the problem behind a dense "fence" of mathematics: Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 224 "... we have locked up quantum physics in "black boxes", which we can handle and operate without knowing what is going on inside. (Audretsch, 2004) (Preface, p x). Physicists use these mathematical black boxes like magic wands, but why the "spells" work we don't really know. Like monkeys in a New York apartment, we know that pressing the switch turns on the light, but not why. Pragmatists say that if the formulae work we don't need to know why, but others feel that the formulae that describe ultimate reality warrant an explanation: "Many physicists believe that some reason for quantum mechanics awaits discovery." (Ford, 2004, p98) One cannot relegate quantum and relativity effects to the "odd" corner of physics, as in many ways these theories are modern physics. Quantum theory rules the microcosmic world, from which the world we see emerges, and relativity rules
permeate modern physics applications, from micro - computer to quad exploration. By some estimates over 40% of US productivity derives from engineering based on quantum theory, admit cellular telephone phones, transistors, lasers, CD players and calculator. Physicists use quantum hypothesis because it works, not because it makes sense: "... physicists who work with the theory every day don‟t truly know quite what to make of it. They fill blackboard with quantum calculations and acknowledge that it is credibly the most potent, accurate, and predictive scientific theory always developed. But... the very suggestion that it may be literally true as a description of nature is even greeted with cynicism, incomprehension, and even anger. " (Vacca, 2005, p. 116) We have precision, proofs and application, but not understanding. We know the mathematics exactly, but can't connect it to our experience of the world, e.g. Feynman's " sum over histories " method calculates quantum result by assuming electrons simultaneously contract all potential path between two points, but how can a basic physical entity like an electron change of location all possible paths between two points at the same meter? While most theories increase understanding, such theories seem to take it away. Despite a hundred of validation, neither relativity or quantum mechanics concepts are taught in high schools today, not because of their complexity, but because the emperor of mod physics has no semantic clothes. Who can teach the unbelievable? Physics has quarantined the trouble behind a dense " fence " of mathematics: Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221 - 249 224 "... we have locked up quantum physics in " black boxes ", which we can handle and operate without knowing what is going on inside. (Audretsch, 2004) (Preface, phosphorus x). Physicists use these mathematical black boxes like charming wands, but why the " spells " work we don't really acknowledge. Like monkeys in a New York apartment, we sleep together that pressing the switch turns on the light, but not why. Pragmatists state that if the formulae work we don't want to know why, but others feel that the formulae that describe ultimate reality justify an explanation: " Many physicists believe that some cause for quantum mechanics awaits discovery. " (Ford, 2004, p98) One cannot banish quantum and relativity effects to the " odd " corner of purgative, as in many ways these theories are modern physics. Quantum theory rules the microcosmic world, from which the world we examine emerges, and relativity rule
 pegmeate modern physics apklications, from mnxro-com'uters fo space exploration. By some estimatxs ocer 40% if US productivity derkves from technoligiew based on quantum bkeory, lnclubiig cell phones, jransistors, nasers, CD playarr cnd computers. Physicists use quantum theory bfcause it workf, nou bqcauav lt makes sense: "... physicists who wkrk witi the theory evrry day don‟t really know qkite what to make of ih. They fill blasjboards with quantum calculations znd acknowledge that it is probxbly che most poqeefup, accurate, aid preqictive scieknific tveory efer developed. Nut... tie vwry suggestion that iv may be literally ttue as a daseription of nature is srill creeded duth cyhirisj, incolprxhension, ans even angee." (Vacca, 2005, p. 116) We have pwvvision, proofa and wp[lications, but not understanding. We knof tge mathematics exactly, vut can't connect it tl our expqrience of the world, e.g. Feynman's "sum over historias" mevhud eqlculxred quantum outcomes by assuming electrons simujfamepusly take all possible pstjs fetween two puints, yht how can a basic pjysical entiry like ag elrctron travel all possible paths betweeu tqo points at the scme time? Whiue mpst tneories increase underscandinf, such theogies seem go take it away. Aesiite a century of validation, nqither reoatirity or duanjum mecranics confepts are taught in high schollv today, noh because of their complexity, bnv because the ekpegor of mobern pmysics has no sqmantic clothex. Who ccn teazh the unbvlievable? Physics haf quarantined jhe problem bxhind a dqnse "fenxe" of mxghematics: Briam Whitwornh Quabtum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 224 "... se have locked bk qoqntum physics on "clask bpxqv", which we cdn hxndur and operatt wlthuut lnowing what is goinc on inside. (Audretsch, 2004) (Pveface, p z). Physicysts use thesr mathematical blafk boees liye mabic wands, but why the "spells" work we don't geajly know. Likq mokkeyf in a New York apartment, we know that pressing tie switch turns on the oight, but not why. Ptagkatists say that if the fmrmulae work we don't need to know why, but others feel that the fmrmulwe that describe ultimate reality warrant an explanation: "Many physicists velievx ehat some rsasom for qbancum mecranirs awaits discoverj." (Ford, 2004, p98) One cannot relegate quentum and sejativity effects to the "odd" vofner of physizs, as in many ways these theoriex are modern physics. Quantum throry rules the microcosmlc world, drom shich nge world we see emerbes, anb relarivity euled
permeate modern physics applications, from micro-computers to By estimates over of US productivity quantum including cell phones, lasers, CD players computers. Physicists use quantum theory because works, not because it makes sense: "... physicists who work with the theory day don‟t really know quite what to make of it. They fill blackboards quantum and that is probably the most powerful, accurate, and predictive scientific theory ever developed. But... the very suggestion it may be literally true as a description nature is still greeted cynicism, incomprehension, and even anger." 2005, 116) We precision, and but not understanding. know the mathematics exactly, but can't connect it to our experience of the world, e.g. Feynman's "sum histories" method outcomes by electrons take possible paths between but how can a basic physical electron travel all possible paths between two points the same While most theories increase understanding, such seem to take it away. Despite a century validation, neither relativity or quantum mechanics concepts are taught in high schools today, not because complexity, but because the of modern physics no clothes. can the unbelievable? has quarantined the problem behind a dense "fence" of mathematics: Brian Quantum Biosystems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 224 "... we have quantum in "black boxes", we can handle and without what is going on 2004) p these black like magic wands, but the "spells" work we don't know. Like monkeys in know that pressing the switch turns on the but not why. Pragmatists say that if formulae work we don't need to know why, but others feel that formulae that reality warrant an explanation: "Many physicists believe that reason for quantum mechanics discovery." (Ford, 2004, p98) One cannot relegate quantum and effects the "odd" of physics, as many ways these are modern physics. rules the world, which see emerges, and relativity rules
 permeate modern physics applIcations, frOm micRo-cOmpUtErs tO spaCe exploration. BY Some Estimates over 40% of US produCtiviTy DErivES fRom teChnologIEs BASed On QuAntUm THeOry, inCluDing celL phones, traNsiStOrs, lasers, CD pLAyErs and compUteRs. Physicists Use QuantuM tHeoRY becaUse It worKs, not bECause iT makes senSe: "... PHysiciSTs who woRK WiTh thE theory every day doN‟T rEAlly know quite wHat to mAkE Of IT. theY fiLl blackboaRdS with QUantum cALcULATioNS and acknowledGe that it is pRObaBly the MoSt pOWerful, AccurAtE, And Predictive sCienTific theoRy ever DEvelopeD. but... the vEry sugGesTioN thaT It MaY be LiTEraLLy TruE As a DescriptIoN oF natuRe is STILL greEteD witH cyniCism, incomprehEnsIon, aND evEn angEr." (VacCa, 2005, p. 116) WE hAve prEcisioN, prooFs And applications, But nOt understAndInG. We KnOw the MAthemaTicS exActly, buT can't coNNecT iT TO OuR experience of the woRlD, E.G. FEynman's "sUm over HIsToRIes" methoD cAlcUlatES QuantUm ouTCoMes by assUming eLEcTrOns simuLtAneousLy TakE alL possIBle pAths beTween two PointS, But how can a basiC Physical entitY LiKE An ELectRon Travel all poSsibLE patHs beTWeEn tWO poinTs at tHe SAmE Time? While most theoriEs IncreaSe undErstanding, sucH theories sEEM To take it Away. dEsPIte a century of vAlidaTion, neitheR RelativiTy or qUantum meChanics coNCEpts are tAugHt iN hiGh sCHOoLs today, not becAUSe of ThEir compLexIty, but bEcaUse The EmpErOr of moderN physics HaS nO sEmAntIc cloTHes. Who caN tEacH tHe uNbeliEVable? PHysicS has QuArANtiNed the pRObLEM behInD a DensE "feNcE" of maThemATicS: Brian WHitworth QUanTUm BiOsYsTems 2010, 2 (1) 221-249 224 "... we hAve locked up quAnTum physics In "BlaCk boxeS", WHich we caN handle and operate withouT Knowing WhaT is goIng oN inside. (AuDreTsch, 2004) (PrEfaCE, p x). PhySicistS use tHeSe mATHematICAl BlaCk Boxes like mAGIc wAnds, bUt Why tHe "spellS" work we don't really kNOw. LIke monkeys in a new york APArTmeNT, wE KnoW tHAt pRESsing the switch tUrns on the lIgHT, bUt not why. PrAGmaTiSts say tHat if thE formULae work We don't neeD to know whY, bUt otHERs fEel that the Formulae That descrIBe ultIMaTe reaLitY warraNt An eXplanAtion: "MANy pHysicIsts beLiEve thaT some ReAson for qUantum mechanics awaits diScoverY." (Ford, 2004, P98) OnE cannot reLegATe qUantum and RelaTivity effeCts To tHe "odd" CorNEr of pHysiCS, aS in MAny waYs thESe theorieS ArE moDERn Physics. QuanTUM TheOry ruLes THe micrOcosMic world, from which THe world we see emErgeS, ANd rElaTIvitY rUles
 permeate modern physics a pplication s, fr ommic ro -com pute rs to space ex p lora tion. By some estimate s ove r4 0% o f  U S pro ductivi t yd e riv es  f rom  t e ch nolog ies  basedon quantum  th eo ry, includin g  c ell phones , t ransistors,las ers, C Dpla y ers a ndcompu ters.P hysici sts use q ua n tum th e ory bec a u se  itworks, not becaus e  i t  makes sense:"... p hy s ic i s tswho  work with  t he th e ory eve r yd a y  do n ‟t really kno w quite wha t  to  makeof  it .  Theyfillbl a ckb oards withquan tum calcu lation s  and ac k nowledg e that  it  is  pro b ab ly  th em ost po wer f ul,  accurat e,  a nd pr edic t i v e  sci ent ific  theo ry ever devel ope d. B u t.. . the  very  sug ge stion  thatit ma ybe literally tr ue a s a descr ipt io n o fnatur e  is st ill  gr eeted w ith cyn i cis m, i n co mprehension, and e ve n an ger." (V acca,2 00 5, p. 116)We  ha ve p r e cisio n, p r oo fs and a pplica t io ns , but n ot  under st and ing . Wek nowthe ma thematic s exa c tly, but can't connect it to ou r ex p erie nce  of the wor ld,e .g.Feyn m an 's" sum o ver h is t or i es" method calculat es  quant um ou tcomes by ass uming elec t r o ns simul tane o us l y take all pos sible  paths bet w een twopoint s, but h ow can ab a sic phys ica l e nti tyl i ke  an electront r avel  a ll poss ibl e paths  be twe entwo  p oints atthe same  t im e?  W hil e mos t  theorie sinc re ase  unde r standi ng, s uchth eo r ies  seem t o  t a k e it  a wa y. D esp it e a c entu r y o f valid ation, ne ith e r re la ti vity or  quantum mech an ics concep ts  ar e taug h t  in high  schools today, not bec a use ofthe ir co mple xity, but  be causethe empero r of m odern  p hys i c s has n osem an tic clothe s .  Wh o can  t each  the un believable? Physic s  ha s quarantined  th e pr o b le m b e hi n d a  d e nse " fence" of mathe matics: Br ia n  W hitworth Q u ant um  Biosys tems 20 10, 2 (1) 221 -249 224"... we h av e lo c k edup quantum  physics  in "blac k  boxe s ",  whic h w e canha ndl e and  opera t e w ithou t know in g what  is g oi ng on in side. (Audretsch, 2004)  (Pref ace,p x ). Physic ist s  us e these m athe matical bl ack  bo xes l ike magic  wan d s,  bu t  whythe" spells" w o rk  we d on 't really k n o w . L ike m onk e ys ina Ne w York apartment, we know that p ress i n g t hes witc hturns on the l igh t, b ut not w hy . Pragmatis ts say t ha t  if t he for mulaework we d on ' t need  tokno w why, bu t o th e rs feel  t ha t  the f ormu la e that  descr i be u l t imate reality wa rrant a n exp l ana tion:  " Many ph y sici sts believ e that some  reaso n fo r qua ntum me ch anicsawa it s discover y ." (Ford,  2004 , p98)On e ca nno t rele gate q uantu m an drel ativity e f f ec t sto the  "od d" co rn er o f physics ,  as in m any ways th es e t h e oriesa re m odern phys ics . Qua n t um theoryr ules th e  micr ocosmi c worl d, from whi ch  the wo rld w e see eme rges, and rel at ivit y rules
 permeate_modern physics_applications, from micro-computers to_space exploration._By_some estimates_over_40% of US_productivity derives from_technologies based on quantum_theory, including cell_phones,_transistors, lasers, CD players and computers. Physicists use quantum theory because it works, not_because_it makes_sense:_"..._physicists who work with the_theory every day don‟t really_know quite_what to make of it. They fill blackboards_with_quantum calculations and_acknowledge that it is probably the most powerful, accurate,_and predictive scientific theory ever developed._But... the very_suggestion_that_it may be literally_true as a description of nature_is still greeted with cynicism, incomprehension,_and even anger." (Vacca, 2005, p. 116)_We have precision, proofs and applications,_but not understanding. We know_the mathematics_exactly, but can't connect it_to our experience_of the_world, e.g. Feynman's_"sum over histories" method calculates quantum_outcomes by assuming_electrons simultaneously take all possible paths_between_two points, but_how_can_a basic_physical entity like_an_electron travel_all_possible paths between two points at_the_same time? While most theories increase understanding,_such theories seem to_take_it away. Despite a_century of validation, neither relativity_or quantum mechanics concepts are taught_in high_schools today,_not because of their complexity, but because the emperor of modern_physics has no semantic clothes. Who_can teach the unbelievable?_Physics has_quarantined_the problem behind_a_dense "fence"_of mathematics: Brian Whitworth Quantum Biosystems 2010,_2 (1)_221-249 224 "... we have locked_up quantum physics in_"black_boxes", which we can handle and_operate without knowing what is going_on inside. (Audretsch, 2004) (Preface,_p_x)._Physicists use these mathematical black_boxes like magic wands, but why_the "spells" work_we don't really know. Like monkeys in_a_New York apartment, we know that_pressing_the switch turns on the light,_but_not_why. Pragmatists say that if_the formulae work we don't need_to know why, but others feel that the formulae_that describe ultimate_reality warrant an explanation: "Many_physicists_believe_that some reason for quantum mechanics awaits discovery." (Ford, 2004,_p98) One_cannot relegate quantum_and relativity effects to the "odd" corner of physics, as_in many ways these theories are modern_physics. Quantum theory rules the microcosmic world, from which the world_we see emerges, and relativity rules