English Chess Forum

The BBC website has published an article summarising a paper published in Science which provides stronger evidence than before of the importance of quantum coherence in photosynthesis. Overall, a very interesting article on a very noteworthy piece of science.

The article, however, has a sidebar, "The weird world of quantum mechanics," explaining the concepts of superposition, entanglement and tunnelling.

Guess what? The sidebar is illustrated with a photo of Albert Einstein. Not Erwin Schrödinger, not Werner Heisenberg, Max Born, Neils Bohr, Max Planck, nor Paul Dirac. Albert Einstein, whose Nobel Prize admittedly was for the photoelectric effect of quantized electrons, but who nevertheless spent decades trying to overturn the new quantum mechanics, as "God doesn't play dice".

Grrr.

Didn't he fudge his own equations too, because he didn't like their implications? My personal hero James Clerk Maxwell would never have done that.

If only we could bring on my physics mentor (I wish!).

Richard Phillips Feynman...

Hands up those that would recognise a photo of Schrödinger, Heisenberg et al.

Brendan O'Gorman wrote:Hands up those that would recognise a photo of Schrödinger, Heisenberg et al.

Not so sure about Al however.

Brendan O'Gorman wrote:Hands up those that would recognise a photo of Schrödinger, Heisenberg et al.

I might. Not all of them, but I've seen and worked on pictures of enough of them that I do sometimes surprise myself. Might be useful in a quiz. But I get your point, that when journalists want a picture of a scientist recognised by the general public, they plump for Einstein.

At the risk of veering from 'Not Chess' into 'Chess', which are the most recognisable chess players, both for the public at large and for the general chess playing population, and for the aficionados of chess history?

Brendan O'Gorman wrote:Hands up those that would recognise a photo of Schrödinger, Heisenberg et al.

I would recognise them all but be uncertain about Heisenberg.

Journalists often wrongly publish pictures of Albert's cousin Alfred who was noteworthy.

E Michael White wrote:

Brendan O'Gorman wrote:Hands up those that would recognise a photo of Schrödinger, Heisenberg et al.

I would recognise them all but be uncertain about Heisenberg

Hi Chris

Ref: Chess players not being recognised.

There is an infamus case of Efim Bogoljubov being brushed out of a picture
of a group of chess players having the pre-tournament picture taken.

The editor said he did not look like a chess player.
(if I recall Bogoljubov was the tournament winner!)

-------------

I've no idea who Erwin Schrödinger was/is.
If he does not push pawns, score goals or runs then I'm not interested.

Einstein I know. (he often gets a mention when some hack covers Lasker)

Though one night after doing 'Clever B*******' by Ian Drury in the Royal Oak,
I had to explain to a group of young things who Einstein was.
What are they teaching them in school these days? Is Einstein non-PC?

And speaking of school kids.

In that picture of the schoolkids, is the kid on the bottom right giving a nazi salute?

----------------------

"Journalists often wrongly publish pictures of Albert's cousin Alfred who was noteworthy."

So Einstein's cousin was Alfred Noteworthy . I never knew that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvebbB5pvJI

Could be that straightness

Might lead to greatness.

Owing to lateness.

All done in a genuine Cockney accent in a pub more known for Scottish Folk songs.
It always goes down well. (except for the confused faces that night...
.....they had not heard of Noel Coward either....Van Gogh 'The eyeball pleaser' they knew.)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPvRsLWlDXw

Brendan O'Gorman wrote:Hands up those that would recognise a photo of Schrödinger, Heisenberg et al.

You know, I don't recall ever seeing a picture of any of 'em. (Nor of Louis de Broglie, who seems to have been unaccountably omitted from the list.) Which only goes to confirm Paul McK's original point.

Geoff Chandler wrote:Ref: Chess players not being recognised.

There is an infamus case of Efim Bogoljubov being brushed out of a picture
of a group of chess players having the pre-tournament picture taken.

The editor said he did not look like a chess player.
(if I recall Bogoljubov was the tournament winner!)

I've read a story about Bogoljubov that was similar in many respects, except it was a blindfold simul, and the editor thought "that fat fellow with the mug of beer looked out of place" among all the other players.

(Old Efim was fond of his ale, all right. According to Golombek, "beer" was the only word of English he knew.)

"I've no idea who Erwin Schrödinger was/is.
If he does not push pawns, score goals or runs then I'm not interested."

He had a cat, which was alive or dead or both. Surely that's interesting?

Hi John,

Now that rings a bell, I'll try later on tonight ot find my sourse but I'm sure you are right.

Hi Keven.

Yes I'm interested so I Google it - 'Schrödinger's Cat' has it's own Wiki page.

Fascinating, but do they not have to do that experiment 9 times because of the cat's nine lives.
(or is that another myth.)

I simply cannot wait to descibe a blunder as a 'Schrödinger blunder'.
It is a blunder against a good player but against a bad player it's a good move.
it is simultaneously a good and bad move, it all depends on the quantum superposition of the opponent.

A Schrödinger Trap!
(Oh Boy am I going to sound clever when I use that one.)

Anybody got anymore scientist whose name I can slip into chess notes.
Is there one who says going back in time is totally impossible?
And he must have a snaz amigo name like Schrödinger with the cool double dots over the 'o'
Not a Smith or Jones (Jönes does not work).

Please let it be Böökenhymer.

'Böökenhymer's Law of Physics states you cannot take a move back.'

Geöff