On 12/31/2017 9:43 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
If you find an empirical quantum tautology violated by Z1*, or
X1*, or S4Grz1,
There's no such thing as an empirical tautology...that's why I
said it's a mugs game.
A tautology is bthe name logicians gave to any propositional
calculus. A quantum tautology is just a theorem in quantum logic,
most are classical tautologies as well, but the inverse is false:
many classical tautologies are not quantum tautologies. Tautology
means theorem.
You talked around the point, but you ended up back at "empirical
theorem" of which there is none.
What do you mean? Theoretical physics can have theorems, in some assumed
theory, which can be tested in the empirical reality. Mechanism is not
new in that regards. In particular, QM was inferred from empirical
observation (+ math, ...), and Quantum logic is inferred/deduced from
QM, and it can be compared with the quantum logics that the theology of
machine imposes to the machine. And that has been done, and it fits.
Would Newtonian physics still be the rule, that would be a strong reason
to make Mechanism non plausible. QM, like Gödel saves Mechanism
and, thus, it questions Materialism.
Bruno
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 https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
