On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 9:50 PM Bruno Marchal <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 28 Oct 2019, at 21:17, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: > > Keep in mind that the wave I have been referring to, is a probability > wave, not a physical wave. AG > > > The whole “problem" is there. The amplitude of probability wave acts like > if it was a physical thing. If not, there would not be any physical wave > interference for single particle. > Now why on earth would you say that? The probability wave is not "a physical thing", so there is no collapse problem. It is epistemic, not ontological. Probability waves can interfere just as easily as can physical waves. Or do you not really believe in the additivity of arithmetic? Bruce -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLSFseVwuRn%2BdQtDCkTyf9pNU6UfgfyQrH6hdSCqiW2Zvg%40mail.gmail.com.
