Editing Talk:1861: Quantum

<!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and not delete this comment.-->
The final paragraph probably should note that Magnets are directly on the ICP "Miracles" axis. [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 18:34, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

And now I have to listen to "Miracles" again. Thanks explainxkcd. [[User:OldCorps|OldCorps]] ([[User talk:OldCorps|talk]]) 19:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Unless Randall includes Quantum Field Theory in Quantum Mechanics (which is unusual), General Relativity certainly must be on the right of QM, but on the chart they are almost same level, why? All physics students learn QM, but only small minority take GR course, because mathematically it's much more demanding.
  If you look closely, General Relativity ''is'' slightly to the right of Quantum Mechanics. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.94|172.68.141.94]] 20:33, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

_I'M_ extremely intrigued by Special Relativity being depicted as requiring not much more math than Basic Physics (the only thing I've studied on this chart - I'm not counting magnets as all I know are the grade school basics), but as being vastly more exciting (I enjoyed the physics courses I took, as far as I remember). :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:46, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 
 It's interesting that special relativity is to the left of magnets when you can explain magnetism as a consequence of special relativity, from each charged particle's frame of reference, it's experiencing an electrostatic attraction or repulsion due to length contraction or an altered electric current due to time dilation.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.214|172.68.141.214]] 05:11, 11 July 2017 (UTC)