On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 06:29:54PM +1000, Bruce Kellett wrote:
> On 24/06/2017 5:23 pm, Russell Standish wrote:
>
> OK, it was possibly the case that you gave arguments earlier in the
> book. But I was going on the basis of the Appendix "Derivation of
> Quantum postulates".
>
> But the problems
On 24/06/2017 5:23 pm, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 03:59:56PM +1000, Bruce Kellett wrote:
Well, I have just taken a quick look. What strikes me is that the
first paragraph of Appendix D defines "Observer moments psi(t) are
sets of possibilities consistent with what is known
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 03:59:56PM +1000, Bruce Kellett wrote:
>
> Well, I have just taken a quick look. What strikes me is that the
> first paragraph of Appendix D defines "Observer moments psi(t) are
> sets of possibilities consistent with what is known at that point in
> time, providing
On 24/06/2017 3:02 pm, Russell Standish wrote:
On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 01:09:41PM +1000, Bruce Kellett wrote:
On 24/06/2017 11:20 am, Russell Standish wrote:
The 3p is what is left after removing all personal baggage of each 1p
view point. It is literally the view from nowhere (since location
4 matches
Mail list logo
