On Saturday, June 6, 2020 at 7:03:02 AM UTC-6, John Clark wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 8:44 AM Alan Grayson <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > *There's a simple choice in this matter. Someone who denies that QM has >> postulates from which the HUP is implied, either knows little or nothing >> about QM, or won't acknowledge it due to dishonesty. AG * >> > > Mr.Carl Sagan co-author, you can prove that one mathematical statement can > be derived from another, but if they deal with physics then the only way to > know if EITHER statement is even approximately true is to test them > experimentally. And if the new physical statement can't be derived from the > physical "postulates" but it nevertheless makes better predictions then > it's time to find new improved physical "postulates". Oh and you forgot IHA. > > John K Clark >
You have command of the obvious, but fail to understand how theories of physics are structured. IHA =? AG -- 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/094ef033-1566-44cf-a798-f7c86a80a37eo%40googlegroups.com.
