Skip to content

Quantum Politics

New York Times columnist David Javerbaum presents a new theory of politics, based on recent observations of the behavior of presidential candidate Mitt Romney. This new theory has striking (and hilarious) similarities to Quantum Mechanics, and violates many of the laws of traditional classical politics. In classical Newtonian Politics (named after Newt Gingrich, in the same way that traditional physics is named “Newtonian Physics” after Sir Isaac Newton), “a candidate’s position on an issue tends to stay at rest until an outside force — the Tea Party, say, or a six-figure credit line at Tiffany — compels him to alter his stance.”

Like Quantum Mechanics, the rules of Quantum Politics are bizarre and appear to violate everyday experience and even common sense. Javerbaum explains the basic concepts of the new political model:

Complementarity. In much the same way that light is both a particle and a wave, Mitt Romney is both a moderate and a conservative, depending on the situation. It is not that he is one or the other; it is not that he is one and then the other. He is both at the same time.

Probability. Mitt Romney’s political viewpoints can be expressed only in terms of likelihood, not certainty. While some views are obviously far less likely than others, no view can be thought of as absolutely impossible. Thus, for instance, there is at any given moment a nonzero chance that Mitt Romney supports child slavery.

Uncertainty. Frustrating as it may be, the rules of quantum campaigning dictate that no human being can ever simultaneously know both what Mitt Romney’s current position is and where that position will be at some future date. This is known as the “principle uncertainty principle.”

Entanglement. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a proton, neutron or Mormon: the act of observing cannot be separated from the outcome of the observation. By asking Mitt Romney how he feels about an issue, you unavoidably affect how he feels about it. More precisely, Mitt Romney will feel every possible way about an issue until the moment he is asked about it, at which point the many feelings decohere into the single answer most likely to please the asker.

Noncausality. The Romney campaign often violates, and even reverses, the law of cause and effect. For example, ordinarily the cause of getting the most votes leads to the effect of being considered the most electable candidate. But in the case of Mitt Romney, the cause of being considered the most electable candidate actually produces the effect of getting the most votes.

Duality. Many conservatives believe the existence of Mitt Romney allows for the possibility of the spontaneous creation of an “anti-Romney” that leaps into existence and annihilates Mitt Romney. (However, the science behind this is somewhat suspect, as it is financed by Rick Santorum, for whom science itself is suspect.)

The figure at right is a Feynman diagram of an encounter between a Romney and an anti-Romney. The resulting collision annihilates both, leaving behind a single electron and a $20 bill.”



  1. TJ wrote:

    Perfect summary of Mitt Romney’s campaign to this point.

    Monday, April 2, 2012 at 10:32 am | Permalink
  2. rk wrote:

    At last, I understand it.

    Monday, April 2, 2012 at 11:32 am | Permalink
  3. Arthanyel wrote:


    That’s it!

    Monday, April 2, 2012 at 8:06 pm | Permalink
  4. Dan wrote:

    Awesome. Extra double points for getting in a Feynman diagram.

    I think the final sentence should read:
    “The resulting collision annihilates both, leaving behind an election and a $20 bill.”

    Monday, April 2, 2012 at 9:03 pm | Permalink
  5. Falkelord wrote:

    This is the funniest thing I have ever read in my entire life.

    Monday, April 2, 2012 at 10:42 pm | Permalink