Hi
[Krimel]
I am shocked that we disagree. But I don't see these 13 years of discussion
as evidence that "special" words have made discussions here easier or even
coherent. I'd say just the opposite. If you said the lack of progress here
and the ambiguity of the MoQ's terms have resulted in 13 years of lack of
consensus; well that would be a great argument against my own position.
I wouldn't call it ambiguity since it implies unintentional
disagreement. It's more of a disagreement on what the terms should mean.
But since we don't specify each time what every one of us mean with the
term when used, it gets complicated.
And I of course don't suggest we invent a completely new language like
Sanskrit to discuss the MoQ. But since we do use some words that do not
have the same meaning as in most dictionaries, then I claim we do use a
new language, whether we like it or not.
[Krimel]
Actually I meant that as a pun on Doug's creation of quantum speak. But I
think it also means a jump from one electron shell to the next without
passing through the intervening space. These seems an odd sort of "atoms
and
void" effect that contributes to quantum weirdness. For your purposes that
jump is a kind of absolutely discrete boundary line but even there what
you
have is an electron "cloud".
[Magnus}
What do you mean by electron "cloud"?
[Krimel]
Cloud, shell, orbit... Those set distances from the nucleus of an atom
wherein one, with some measurable degree of probability, might find an
electron.
Ok, ok. I just thought you were implying something else by mentioning it
right after "absolutely discrete boundary". Were you?
Magnus
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
