On 10 May 2013, at 18:12, meekerdb wrote:
On 5/10/2013 1:14 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
Indeed. Even more so when you see that the collapse is really an
axiom saying that the theory (QM) does not apply to observation.
The old QM is really like "QM + QM is false".
Then there has been that myth that "observation perturbs", making
the collapse looking very much like a physical normal thing to
happen, but Einstein made the remark that if that was the case, the
observation can no more be covariant, and Bohr replied simply "OK,
that collapse is not a physical process", but then what is it?
An epistemological one?
Exactly. And with comp, this leads to self-reference relatively to
many universal numbers, in many different senses.
A complex calculus, no doubt.
Bruno
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en
.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
