On 06 Mar 2014, at 02:51, chris peck wrote:
Hi Bruno
>> The question is: can you refute this.
To my own satisfaction? Yes. To your satisfaction? Apparantly not.
Refuting means to the satisfaction of everyone.
Though perhaps you have an ideological agenda
Which one would that be. Could you focus on the technical point.
and are just trying very hard not to be refuted?
The exact contrary. I have made all this public only after convincing
more than hundreds of person, and then the submission has followed the
academical rule, and this without much problems, except some not even
related to anything technical.
>> And for the UDA, you don't need the 50%. You need only to assess
the indeterminacy, and its invariance for the changes described in
the next steps.
By your own admission your steps are dumbed down for morons like me
and display a lack of rigour.
You cannot say something like this. It is unscientific in the extreme.
You must say at which step rigor is lacking.
You make vague negative proposition containing precise error in
elementary statistics.
Perhaps your book might help?
If I don't buy my little 2 year old a treat this month maybe I can
afford it. Are there an awful lot of sums? I hate sums.
Well its your call Bruno, should I treat my son or buy your book?
>> What is you talk about the step 4? It asks if the way to
evaluate the P(W) and the P(M) changes if some delay of
reconstitution is introduced in W, or in M.
It doesn't change as far as I can see. Its still P(1) for both.
Then you omit, like Clark, the simple and obvious fact that if in H
you predict P(M) = 1, then the guy in Moscow will understand that the
prediction was wrong.
Like Clark, you confine yourself in the 3-1 views, without ever
listening to what the duplicated persons say.
Given that the question bears on those data, available in the 3-view,
you just abstract yourself from the question asked.
So if you have a refutation of the point made, you have still to
provide it.
Bruno
I'll tell you what, I'll have another look at step 7. see if I can
make head or tails of it the fifth or sixth time around....Last time
I got stuck at the floating pen.
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 14:05:21 +1300
Subject: Re: Tegmark and UDA step 3
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Brent, could you please reply to Edgar? He is, I'm sure, eagerly
awaiting your response so he can unleash a torrent of carefully
thought out arguments which will cover every point you've made. (As
indeed am I.)
On 1 March 2014 13:46, Edgar L. Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
Brent,
Are you addressing that question to me? You are responding to a post
by Liz talking about "your" theory. If so I'll be glad to answer.
On Friday, February 28, 2014 6:14:42 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:
On 2/28/2014 2:43 PM, LizR wrote:
If anyone is looking for the source of quantum randomness I've
already provided an explanation. It occurs as fragmentary spacetimes
are created by quantum events and then merged via shared quantum
events. There can be no deterministic rules for aligning separate
spacetime fragments thus nature is forced to make those alignments
randomly.
OK, I'll bite. Show us the maths and the experts can see how it
stacks up against Everett et al.
But sadly no one on this group is interested in quantum theory, only
relativity, and far out philosophies such as 'comp'.
On the contrary, I am interested in your theory of quantum
randomness IF you can flesh it out. For example how do you describe
a Stern-Gerlach experiment, a Vaidman no-interaction measurment, an
EPR experiment, Bose-Einstein condensate,...?
--
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.
--
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.
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 [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.
