quantum physics

Don't be frightened by the title, I only ever made it half way through 'The Elegant Universe' before the certainty of my limitation to understand 'abstract' concepts (I'm almost sure that's not the right word [I can usually grasp abstractions of reality, realities based on math problems is another matter]) came crashing down. I'll address what I understand to be the most subjective theme in this book; perception and actuality. And I must add a disclaimer here, my understanding of actuality is based wholly on perception [see; opinions, May 14, 2007].
We esthetes have a particular disadvantage in this world, we tend only to believe what we see. Our communication with other people is based on somehow recreating that visual understanding of something for them. It's not too complicated a process to create fine art for them- in that venue they are usually already prepared to be confused/awed. But imagine trying to convince a man wearing Sans-A-Belt trousers that it is not in his best interest to use a circus clown on a sign to advertise Persian carpets. It's a pitch that ends unconvincingly for both of us. More formitable is the limitation placed on my kind to participate in a day-to-day world. When one's ability to pay bills on time is predicated with a reliance on the spacial relationships of a calender page, one is laboring under a distinct disadvantage. How does this relate to quantum physics? I'm not exactly sure that if does, but I kinda remember something in that book about Bim and Bam (or was it George and Gracie) traveling in seperate spaceships. Was Bim traveling faster to arrive at his destination light years before he was born? And/or was Bam watching his friend from out of his porthole, aging in his wake. Oh yeah, one of them had a watch.
The difficulty of making our experience understood to one another seems all the more insurmountable added that our measures of success differ so greatly. As great as our capacity is to impress one another, so is our ability to disappoint. There was a bit of relief in the former understanding of all things ending in a finite dot. They should have left it at that, what could be tidier. Now to think that that dot is actually a string? How is humanity served by broadening our scope of the unknowable. That just proves to me that these theorists have gone beyond mixing fractions with letters from the greek alphabet in an effort to out-think one another and confound the rest of us. And all sheerly for the dramatic effect of restating something we all ache to say on our own behalf, " I'm really not as dumb as I look."