On Thursday, October 18, 2012 11:19:46 PM UTC-4, Stephen Paul King wrote:
> On 10/18/2012 2:16 PM, freqflyer07281972 wrote:
> > Is anyone here aware of the following?
> > Does it have implications for MW interpretations of quantum physics?
> > I'd love to see comments about this.
> > Cheers,
> > Dan
> > --
> Hi Dan,
> This article is rubbish. The writer does not understand the
> subtleties involved and does not understand that nothing like the tittle
> was found to be true.
I agree. I see what they were trying to get at: Measurement can cause
uncertainty but not all of the uncertainty. They leave open the question of
what does cause the uncertainty - i.e. perhaps the very nature of quantum
is uncertain or immeasurable.
The problem of course is in the assumption "we're just going to make a
*weak* measurement that won't have an effect on it". Sigh. I'll just stand
in the bathroom with you...you won't even know I'm here. You can't fool the
fabric of the universe. You can spoof it maybe, but you can't hide from it
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at