PART A: Discussion

Read chapter 10 (“Beware of Evil Squirrels”) of “How to teach physics to your dog” by Orzel, and then the following 3 articles:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/wormhole-entangleme…

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/alison-rose-levy/sa…

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-250…

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jyIw_cXpA_jk4rMBy…

You must make 3 substantive posts in the discussion threads in 3 different threads about 120 words, discussing the above articles and general tactics to spot pseudoscience (especially related to quantum physics). Which parts of the articles are accurate (if any)? Which parts of them are nonsense (if any)? How easy or hard is the nonsense to detect? What misconceptions about quantum physics do you see being portrayed? Do they fall into the categories laid out in chapter 10 of “How to teach physics to your dog”? What “red flags” do you see that alert you to nonsense being detected, other than just things they get wrong about quantum physics. What do you look for to indicate an article is valid?

PART B: Essay

Find two articles which somehow misrepresent or misuse quantum physics. For each article, explain in detail

– what are the concepts that the articles are misusing?
– how are they being misinterpreted or misused?
– what is the correct version of the concepts?

The more reputable, and widely-read, the site the articles come from, the better!

Cite your sources (including discussion posts) fully.

This project should be about 4-5 pages (single spaced, 12pt font), and be succinct but complete. That amounts to 1-1.5 pages per article, and 1-1.5 pages for the summary and conclusions, and 0.5-1 page for the references.