Hey, I just realized, his story yields a paradox! I can do the following: I have the two envelopes, results and detector. I open the results envelope with the following conviction: if there is an interference pattern, I will open the detector envelope. If there is no interference pattern, I will burn the detector envelope. Hence, there will be an interference pattern inside the results envelope if and only if there is no interference pattern inside the results envelope.
Hence, the situation K describes is impossible. QED. cd On Sep 6, 4:47 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > No, no. Because if you turn the detector on half-way through, you STILL get > the interference pattern of collapse. I think. > > In a message dated 9/6/2008 4:05:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > I always thought it was just decoherence and that arose > from any causal interaction. > > **************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, > plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. > (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
