Bruno Marchal wrote:

> George Levy wrote:
>> Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>> George Levy asks recently "Could somebody incorporate 
>>> complementarity in a thought experiment in the style of Bruno's 
>>> duplication experiment?"
>>> This is an interesting proposal and I would be glad if someone manage
>>> to present one. Just that it is *because* duplication-like 
>>> experiment leads
>>> quickly to obscurities and misleading intuitions, *that* modal logic
>>> appears to be a fruitful investment, even if it is not the only one.
>> GL: As it stand, the comp hypothesis is only a philosophical exercise 
>> because it does not reproduce the same phenomenon as QM in particular 
>> the phenomenon of complementarity.
> BM:
> Do you mean "it does not reproduce the same phenomenon as QM", or do
> you mean that we have not yet understood how it could reproduce the
> same ph enomenon as QM"? 

I don't know enough to be certain about either possibility. But if comp 
is true, it is not intuitive how it can explain QM. There is a need for 
a thought experiment that would connect the two.

> I will not bore you with technics buts complementarity can be handled
> in Z1* (extract from comp) although there are still open problems.

If you could construct a thought experiment using Z1, it would certainly 
stengthen the argument for comp as a potential explanation for QM.

Reply via email to