Hittin' the Bricks with Kathleen

Quantum Genealogy: Method versus Metaphor

• Kathleen Brandt • Episode 2659

Share episode

Use Left/Right to seek, Home/End to jump to start or end. Hold shift to jump forward or backward.

0:00 | 16:26

Let us know what you think!

Episode Overview

Hittin’ the Bricks with Kathleen is the genealogy podcast that features your questions and her answers, focusing on clear reasoning, historical context, and practical research methods. In this episode, host Kathleen Brandt unpacks the growing buzz around the term “quantum genealogy,” explaining why it functions as a metaphor rather than a research method—and why real genealogical breakthroughs still depend on careful human analysis.

The episode examines how DNA evidence, overlapping matches, and complex family structures can feel uncertain or contradictory, while clarifying where computing tools help—and where they do not decide conclusions.

In This Episode, You’ll Learn

  • What people usually mean when they say “quantum” in a genealogy context
  • Why quantum computing does not change biological inheritance or kinship
  • How new evidence requires reanalysis and revised conclusions
  • Where DNA tools assist research and where human judgment remains essential
  • Why buzzwords can obscure, rather than clarify, good genealogical practice

Topics Covered

  • “Quantum genealogy” as a metaphor for uncertainty and overlap
  • The limits of quantum computing in genealogical research
  • Overlapping DNA matches and shared ancestry
  • Complexities in African American genealogy, including endogamy
  • Blood quantum basics and its role in tribal enrollment
  • Interpretation, context, and evidence-based reasoning
  • Community conversation at the Nelson-Atkins Museum (Kansas City)

Episode Discussion & Key Moments

Kathleen breaks down how the term “quantum genealogy” has entered popular conversation and why it can be misleading when treated as a method rather than a metaphor. She explains that while computing power can accelerate comparison and sorting of data, it does not alter the realities of inheritance, kinship, or historical context.

The episode also addresses challenging areas of research, including African American genealogy, where overlapping DNA matches, endogamy, and incomplete records demand especially careful interpretation. Kathleen clarifies the role—and limits—of blood quantum, emphasizing why legal or enrollment definitions should not be confused with genealogical proof.

Key questions examined include:

  • Why does DNA evidence sometimes seem contradictory?
  • How should researchers respond when new evidence changes earlier conclusions?
  • What role should technology play versus human reasoning?

Events & Community Conversation

  • Community discussion at the Nelson-Atkins Museum, Kansas City
  • Free event; light refreshments served

Why This Episode Matters

As genealogy tools grow more powerful, this episode reinforces a critical principle: technology assists research, but interpretation belongs to people. Clear thinking, context, and evidence—not buzzwords—remain the foundation of sound genealogical conclusions.

About the Podcast

Hittin’ the Bricks with Kathleen is the genealogy podcast that features your questions and her answers, helping listeners navigate complex evidence, historical nuance, and modern research tools with clarity and confidence.

Subscribe & Connect

Be sure to bookmark linktr.ee/hittinthebricks for your one stop access to Kathleen Brandt, the host of Hittin' the Bricks with Kathleen. And, visit us on YouTube: @HTBKRB with Kathleen John and Chewey video recorded specials.

Hittin' the Bricks is produced through the not-for-profit, 501c3 TracingAncestors.org.

John:

Ladies and gentlemen from the depths of flyover country in the heartland of America, the Kansas City on the other side of the mighty Moe, welcome to Hittin' the Bricks with Kathleen, the Do It Yourself Genealogy podcast with your questions and her answers. I am John, your humble hubby host, and today we'll be addressing a quantum of questions from the mailbag. There's a lot to cover, so let's start hitting the bricks. Have I ever told you how much I hate the word quantum? You hate the word quantum? I hate the word quantum. Yes.

Kathleen:

Is there a reason?

John:

Yes, it is used all the time for a bunch of stuff that never means the same thing, and that's why I hate it. Because you have quantum leaps, which is supposed to be a big thing, and then you have uh quantum mechanics, which is supposed to be a small thing, and then quantum physics, and then a quantum of this, and a quantum of solace, and everybody's got a quantum, and I'm sick of the word quantum because everybody uses it differently, and it never means the same thing twice.

Kathleen:

Okay, so John, let's get back on topic. We are talking about quantum today. Oh how genealogy and quantum are related. We have about five or six questions from the mailbag that I actually pulled. We've had a lot more, but I think this kind of summarizes them.

John:

And that's what I've got sitting over here. So I guess I can I guess I could maybe my question or my consternation will be somewhat diffused or allayed because of uh one of the questions in the mailbag. Okay. Okay, so the question is is quantum genealogy an actual scientific method? And that's a good question.

Kathleen:

And the answer to that is scientific method, no. It might be in the future. We might be using it a lot more with DNA computations. Uh not us, but the companies, which will give us faster, but we will always have to have the human aspect in genealogy. Now, in nine go ahead.

John:

When you when you referred to the companies doing that, are you talking about with quantum computing or are you talking about quantum computing?

Kathleen:

Okay, yes, quantum computing. So in 1996, there was an article about the quantum leaps of genealogy, and I'll I have it in my blog. And it was talking about how you know genealogy had become so popular in the nursing homes. But that's not the quantum we're talking either.

John:

We're not talking about the metaphorical okay.

Kathleen:

Yeah, well, actually the metaphorical types we are talking about.

John:

How is it used genealogically? That's my question. I don't even get how we're talking about quantum the word quantum with genealogy. What is it?

Kathleen:

Because we do look at the complexity of uncertainty and the overlapping structures.

John:

Okay, so is quantum genealogy an actual scientific method?

Kathleen:

No, it is not. So so in gene genealogy, John, when we refer to quantum, we are just talking about metaphorically. We're comparing the complexity and uncertainty and overlapping evidence. It does not change our genealogical methods. It's possible in the future that the quantum, the scientific part being quantum uh computing will make a difference in our results, the speed of our results.

John:

It's not a specific methodology, it is a metaphor. But is it related to quantum physics or DNA inheritance?

Kathleen:

So quantum computing does relate directly to the future of DNA, which means speed and power of the genetic DNA analysis, right? The data analysis. So that does. However, when they talk about quantum and genealogy together, they're really talking about our methodology that we already practice on a daily basis. And a lot of people are using quantum genealogy or quantum methodology. It's just different articles out there.

John:

So there it that's what's driving me nuts, then. It's a buzzword, isn't it?

Kathleen:

It's a buzzword in our case. Okay, so we're because it is metaphorically used. Let me just back up just a little bit further. Yes. So when I mean it's quantum metaphorically, I'm saying that it expresses that the family history isn't linear. Instead, it's layered, it's personal, and it's tied to identity. That's all we're saying when we're say it talking about it from a genealogical standpoint. Scientifically, when you get new evidence, then you have to reevaluate. You're looking at more information. We do the same in genealogy. As we pull documents, we might find confusing information that uh rejects something we already have seen. So again, we have new evidence and we have to be open to considering that this has an impact of our past research.

John:

Their research might need to change, or they might need to accept an unexpected answer based on revelations that might come up through DNA, might come up through deeper studies of DNA markers.

Kathleen:

That's correct. You have it. You have it. See, you you're gonna be the quantum expert here at A3 Genealogy and Tracing Ancestors.

John:

I'm not a smart man, but I know what quantum is. I'm hoping for retirement first. I'm hoping the quantum would be.

Kathleen:

Sometimes, John, a genealogist will pick up documents and they think, oh, this is my answer, this is what I'm looking for. And they are so sure about that. And then two days later, they find a document that muddies the water. It could just give enough information to cause doubt. And that is that quantum part that they're referring to in all of the articles I have read. The issue is is quantum genealogy related to quantum physics or DNA inheritance? And the answer is no. The answer is no. Physics doesn't affect inheritance at all. But the future computing companies, the companies that compute our DNA analysis or come up with a DNA analysis, that process may be enhanced using quantum computing, but it does not change how DNA has passed. So the results won't be different. It would just be a process of faster.

John:

So it's it's back-end stuff. It's back-end processing that doesn't affect relationship, uh GNA, DNA or inheritance or anything else. It's just a back-end process for computing.

Kathleen:

So there was an article written in 2010, and basically it talked about genealogy and the evidence and the probability and the interpretation. They tied that article into quantum genealogy. But it does not change our analysis or our practices. It just changes the theory that as we get new evidence, you have to reanalyze something. Just like any other thing, when you see a small data set, when we get a small document controversial to what we already have, we have to reanalyze it. So that's the only thing that ties genealogy to quantum physics at all. It's just a metaphor to say that with new evidence you have to reanalyze. Does that clear up your question on quantum, John? Are you embracing quantum now?

John:

No, I'm not embracing it at all. I still think you can't just slap the word quantum in front of everything. I mean you can, but it doesn't help your credibility.

Kathleen:

And that's probably why I've avoided answering most of these questions. Sometimes I send them articles, but in general, when we see it real is with blood quantum.

John:

Well, that that's a specific measurement. So I'm with that. I'm down with uh I'm down with that one. As the kids would say.

Kathleen:

So in general, the way you enter into a Native American tribe, they ask you to have a certain amount of blood. That is computed based on your generations, but again, it doesn't change how we operate. Because we already know that you only have 3.1 uh percentage, a little over 3.1 percentage of Native American blood if your third great grandparent was 100%. Or no, so we'd already know the percentage you would have, and then we also know the percentage required by that tribe to be a member of the tribe.

John:

That makes sense to me. Again, it's speaking of it in terms of measurement, which I'm A-OK with.

Kathleen:

So otherwise it's just a metaphor, right? It's like, oh, it's complex. Oh, it I found new evidence, I need to reanalyze. I this might may or may not be. And that's where the the quantum deep dive. Exactly. And why genealogists have borrowed the name quantum.

John:

Well, I want them to stop borrowing it. And I want them to give it back to the physicists who are meant to have it.

Kathleen:

So, John, I'm looking here at mailback question six. Maybe you should read it.

John:

Okay.

Kathleen:

I was gonna say read it out loud.

John:

Oh. Do you want me to read it out loud? I I didn't realize you wanted me to do that. Okay, so here's um here's a mailbag question about our quantum conundrum.

Kathleen:

Okay.

John:

Yeah, I spelled conundrum with a Q on that, just in case.

Kathleen:

Oh wow.

John:

Yeah. Just in case people didn't get the alliteration there. Okay, so I research African American families, and when I use DNA, I'm often connected to multiple black and white families at the same time. The matches overlap, the surnames repeat, and it's hard to tell what's direct descent and what's shared history. Is that what people mean when they talk about quantum genealogy?

Kathleen:

Okay, so that's a really good question, right? So the answer is yes. When genealogy uses the term quantum really loosely, um, this is what they're trying to describe. They're trying to describe not the physics and not the jargon, not the scientific jargon, John. What they're trying to describe is the historical complexity. Let's say in African American genealogy, DNA doesn't really just tell us about parent and child lines. It gives us a lot more information. It might give us more on enslavement. And after you get that, you might find something on the forced migrations from Africa to the United States or cross country because of selling of slaves. Or it might be based on Native Americans there, where you have the forced migrations, right?

John:

Right.

Kathleen:

Or endogamy and communities. The DNA tells us a lot more than just how much we got from our mother's line and our father's line.

John:

That's really helpful because it's describing, uh, as far as quantum goes, understanding quantum genealogy, uh, it describes the uncertainty of these these tiny little pieces of a long history. Uh so you're looking at a history and you you have these events, larger events in the history, but then when you get down to the granular aspects of what moved those histories, what changed those, what affected those DNAs, then you have those unmeasurables that are not necessarily reflected in the research. Okay. Yes. Now I'm starting to get why you might want to use maybe the quantum uh metaphor works within that context.

Kathleen:

So in African American genealogy, and and I'm just bringing that up because we know that is definitely a muddy genealogical history. That the name changes after emancipation, the non-traditional family structures, the history compared to records. All of that causes the complexity of genealogy. So none of the quantum part will change that because we have to have a human to evaluate and to understand what's going on. It has no meaning except metaphorically.

John:

So we uh again, it's more of a metaphor than it is a description of a scientific methodology that's new to genealogy.

Kathleen:

Future tools may help surface patterns, you know, through computers or sort data faster, but they don't interpret meaning. And that's where the human comes in. It we have to understand naming changes from emancipation or recognize non-traditional family structures, or perhaps weigh some history books. We have to look at it that way. So we're doing the human analysis, not the computers.

John:

Which is always, I think, the the human interpretation is always the important part.

Kathleen:

That means that the evidence reflects a history shaped by survival, resilience, um, and systemic injustice.

John:

Oh, quite a bit of that, I would imagine.

Kathleen:

Careful interpretation is what gives genealogy meaning. That's what gives the evidence meaning. So that is why we encourage us to read more, learn more, because of words like this that really confuses the concept and our end results. John, I do want to bring up a couple more things just to let our listeners know. On February 21st, as you know, this is Black History Month. There's a lot of celebrations in every city and every town, and hopefully the communities are healing. The Nelson Atkins Art Museum in Kansas City will be having a community conversation on February 21st. And I am one of the speakers. I did the genealogy for Glenn North, who's been on our podcast, and he has his own podcast. He will be one of the speakers. And it's also featuring Camry Ivory, who is an amazing artist where she takes paint brushes to tell the story and it makes music. I'm so excited.

John:

Yeah, that's why I would go. I wouldn't go to see you or Glenn. I would be going to see Coloratura, but I I'm sorry.

Kathleen:

I'm gonna take this I'm taking the knife out of my heart, but I'm sure Camry would love to hear that.

John:

I'm using a quantum of honesty. Oh wow, please don't.

Kathleen:

I've never seen Camry do this in person. I've only seen the videos. So I'm really excited just to be a part of uh this program, also. That sounds cool. And we do have light refreshments, and it's free.

John:

Very cool. Always, very cool. And always, it's always something that you can count on from libraries and museums is uh typical outreach to the community that often is free of charge and well worth supporting. What else? That's it. Well, congratulations, you made it to the end of another episode. Thanks so much for staying. Thanks to Chewy Chewbacca Brandt for his unwavering lack of interest in anything we're doing. The theme song for Hittin't the Bricks was written and performed by Tony Fitzknuckle and the Emeralds. Watch for the next appearance at your local pegmatite fame. Do you have a genealogical question for Kathleen? Drop us a line at hitting the bricks at gmail.com and let us know.

Head Shot

Kathleen Brandt

Host
Head Shot

John Brandt

Co-host