On Thu, Jul 03, 2014 at 12:23:35AM -0400, Richard Ruquist wrote: > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Russell Standish <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 04:30:52PM -0400, Stephen Paul King wrote: > > > Hi Russell, > > > > > > Ah! I don't quite grok it completely, but thank you for this example. We > > > had to assume an already existing measure on the Reals. Where does that > > > come from? > > > > > > > The standard measure on the reals is based on the observation that we > > expect the set of real numbers starting with 0.110... to have the same > > measure as those starting with 0.111... That would be a reasonable > > default assumption for most purposes. > > > The measure obtained by compression of the reals in binary form is close to > the quantum mechanic measure, but not exact. > In fact, the quantum measure varies with the scenario, whereas the measure > of the reals is invariant. > Richard >
What do you mean? What is this "quantum measure"? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Prof Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) Principal, High Performance Coders Visiting Professor of Mathematics [email protected] University of New South Wales http://www.hpcoders.com.au Latest project: The Amoeba's Secret (http://www.hpcoders.com.au/AmoebasSecret.html) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- 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/d/optout.
