> Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 13:02:31 +1100
> From: li...@hpcoders.com.au
> To: everything-l...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [kevintr...@hotmail.com: Jacques Mallah]

> All I have ever said was that effective probability given by the
> squared norm of the projected eigenvector does not follow from Born's
> rule. It can't follow, because Born's rule says nothing about what the
> normalisation of the state vector after observation should be. It is a
> conditional probability only.
I still don't understand the connection you're making. When people say the 
effective probability is equal to the amplitude squared, it doesn't require you 
to assume anything about the state vector *after* observation (in particular 
you don't have to assume an objective collapse), it's just the square of the 
norm of the vector you get when you project the system's (normalized) state 
vector at the instant *before* observation onto an eigenvector. 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to