On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
>> With Quantum Mechanics NOTHING is a wave function, that is to say no >> observable quantity is. The wave function is a calculation device of no >> more reality than lines of longitude and latitude. If you want to talk >> about reality you've got to SQUARE the wave function, and even then all you >> get is a probability not a certainty; not only that but the wave function >> contains imaginary numbers so 2 different wave functions can yield the >> exact same probability when you square it. >> > > > Sure, I agree if you want to define 'things' as decoherence > I define a "thing" as anything observable; it's what most people mean when they say something like "concrete reality". > rather than the wave functions that decohere to produce them. That's > standard QM. I'm just using common parlance. > Quantum Mechanics can be formulated in a way that makes no use of wave functions whatsoever, in fact that was the way Heisenberg originally did it. It was only 6 months later that Schrodinger came up with his wave equation. Both methods come up with the exact same probability prediction and which method used in the calculation is entirely a matter of personal taste. And there is no arguing in matters of taste. > But this is irrelevant to my points. > Your point was "everything is a wavefunction" and your point was about as far from the truth as it's possible to get. John K Clark -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
