On Tue, Jan 7, 2014 at 1:50 PM, LizR <[email protected]> wrote: >> I don't understand your point, are you arguing that time is asymmetric >> or that it is not? The existence of neutral kaon decay strengthens the >> already very strong argument that time is asymmetric, but only very >> slightly. Yes a movie of neutral kaon decay would look slightly different >> if run forward rather than backward, but not if you looked at the reversed >> film in a mirror and you assumed the electrical charges were reversed. CPT >> (Charge Parity Time) symmetry still holds true. >> > > > I'm arguing that time is symmetric, >
Good luck winning that argument when nearly everything we observe, from cosmology to cooking, screams at us that time is NOT symmetric. > I don't know why there is so much fuss over Bell's inequality > I do. > it was actually discovered before Bell died that there's a perfectly > reasonable explanation for how his inequality can be violated that retains > locality and realism. > Baloney. 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.
