> Individual particles have half-lives, they can be each measured to decay.
Just like how individual people have memory, and their ability to recall things can be measured.
> Their having this property follows from QM, it doesnt not follow from population statistics.
Nope. It's entirely impossible to determine the half life of a substance by observing a single particle, nor can the value be derived mathematically from QM or any other theory. The time it will take for a single particle to decay is random and unpredictable, and the half life can only be determined by looking at population statistics.
Even still, the half life is a real physical property, and it does tell us the percent likelihood for a single particle to decay over a given span of time. And if we (for example) wanted to design an experiment or a mechanism, and we were dealing with an unstable substance, we absolutely could use the half life of that substance to decide the optimal parameters of that experiment (e.g. we can use the half life to assume that a certain approximate amount of radiation will be emitted from the substance over a given period of time).
So I really don't see what is so strange or pseudoscientific about saying that, if we know experimentally that people tend to remember things better under certain conditions, then let's apply those conditions in a classroom in an attempt to have the students retain more information. Your argument is basically that particles are simple and people are not. But that's both irrelevant and subjective.
Just like how individual people have memory, and their ability to recall things can be measured.
> Their having this property follows from QM, it doesnt not follow from population statistics.
Nope. It's entirely impossible to determine the half life of a substance by observing a single particle, nor can the value be derived mathematically from QM or any other theory. The time it will take for a single particle to decay is random and unpredictable, and the half life can only be determined by looking at population statistics.
Even still, the half life is a real physical property, and it does tell us the percent likelihood for a single particle to decay over a given span of time. And if we (for example) wanted to design an experiment or a mechanism, and we were dealing with an unstable substance, we absolutely could use the half life of that substance to decide the optimal parameters of that experiment (e.g. we can use the half life to assume that a certain approximate amount of radiation will be emitted from the substance over a given period of time).
So I really don't see what is so strange or pseudoscientific about saying that, if we know experimentally that people tend to remember things better under certain conditions, then let's apply those conditions in a classroom in an attempt to have the students retain more information. Your argument is basically that particles are simple and people are not. But that's both irrelevant and subjective.