On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 11:32:13 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com
wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 11:22:45 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/10/2017 10:01 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 2:16:04 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>>>
On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 11:22:45 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/10/2017 10:01 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 2:16:04 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/10/2017 1:01 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, November 10,
On 11/10/2017 10:01 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 2:16:04 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
On 11/10/2017 1:01 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 12:19:05 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
On 11/10/2017 4:06 AM, Alan Grayson
Renormalization.
On 11/10/2017 9:56 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
How is the resultant value kept between 0 and 1? TIA.
--
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,
On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 2:16:04 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/10/2017 1:01 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 12:19:05 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/10/2017 4:06 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:32 PM,
How is the resultant value kept between 0 and 1? TIA.
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 12:46 PM, John Clark wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:43 AM, wrote:
>
> >
>> If the measurement problem were solved in the sense being able to predict
>> exact outcomes,
>>
>
> That's not the measurement problem, its
On 11/10/2017 1:01 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 12:19:05 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
On 11/10/2017 4:06 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Brent Meeker
wrote:
On 11/9/2017 9:15 PM, Alan
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>
> On 11/10/2017 4:06 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Brent Meeker
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 11/9/2017 9:15 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017
On Friday, November 10, 2017 at 12:19:05 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/10/2017 4:06 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Brent Meeker > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 11/9/2017 9:15 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:05
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:43 AM, wrote:
>
> If the measurement problem were solved in the sense being able to predict
> exact outcomes,
>
That's not the measurement problem, its determining if how and why
observation effects things.
>
> thus making QM a
On 11/10/2017 4:06 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Brent Meeker > wrote:
On 11/9/2017 9:15 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Brent Meeker
On 09 Nov 2017, at 16:43, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
If the measurement problem were solved in the sense being able to
predict exact outcomes,
?
Quantum Mechanics would be refuted (with or without wave packet
reduction).
thus making QM a deterministic theory,
You mean
On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Brent Meeker wrote:
>
>
> On 11/9/2017 9:15 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:05 PM, Brent Meeker
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 11/9/2017 8:55 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday,
14 matches
Mail list logo