Good catch on angle/angular momentum. Obvious now that you point it out.
"Illusion of understanding" - I don't see what's so illusory about understanding one case - the most commonly met case, the one people hear about and get confused by.
If one has looked into quantum mechanics enough to know about the other cases, and understands the position/momentum connection, but can't figure out the nature of the relationship of these other cases... such a person is sufficiently black-swan-ish that I don't believe failure to account for em when writing the sequence was really a deficiency.
"Illusion of understanding" - I don't see what's so illusory about understanding one case - the most commonly met case, the one people hear about and get confused by.
What I mean is that the position-momentum case is explained so well and so convincingly by EY (took me quite a bit of thinking to convince myself that the other examples are not covered by his explanation), that an uninitiated reader gets an illusion of understanding the general principle, not just this one specific case. And a misled disciple is the worst kind.
Today's post, The So-Called Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle was originally published on 23 April 2008. A summary (taken from the LW wiki):
Discuss the post here (rather than in the comments to the original post).
This post is part of the Rerunning the Sequences series, where we'll be going through Eliezer Yudkowsky's old posts in order so that people who are interested can (re-)read and discuss them. The previous post was Decoherence, and you can use the sequence_reruns tag or rss feed to follow the rest of the series.
Sequence reruns are a community-driven effort. You can participate by re-reading the sequence post, discussing it here, posting the next day's sequence reruns post, or summarizing forthcoming articles on the wiki. Go here for more details, or to have meta discussions about the Rerunning the Sequences series.