Re: Conway Life emulating Conway Life

Really incredible video! Thanks for sharing. Jason On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 3:03 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > Hi, > > Here is a wonderful video showing an emulation of the game of life, > programmed in the game of life. It illustrates well the notion of > emulation. In fact

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/17/2017 6:41 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: *Not sure of the distinction between "an operator" and a "local operator" in the context of the singlet state. * A local operator would be one that interacts with only one of the two particles, i.e. it's located near Alice or near Bob,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 18/11/2017 4:05 pm, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/17/2017 8:35 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 7:18:23 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: No, Bruce was thinking of what /*local */operator could be implemented. In theory any pure state can be an element of a

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/17/2017 8:35 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 7:18:23 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: On 11/17/2017 6:08 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 6:41:43 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: On 11/17/2017 4:04 PM,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 7:18:23 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 11/17/2017 6:08 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 6:41:43 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 11/17/2017 4:04 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, November 17, 2017

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 7:18:23 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 11/17/2017 6:08 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 6:41:43 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 11/17/2017 4:04 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Friday, November 17, 2017

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/17/2017 6:08 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 6:41:43 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: On 11/17/2017 4:04 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 2:38:40 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: On 11/17/2017 1:17 PM,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 6:41:43 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 11/17/2017 4:04 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 2:38:40 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >> >> >> >> On 11/17/2017 1:17 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> *I think "must" is unwarranted,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/17/2017 4:23 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 18/11/2017 10:43 am, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 3:18:39 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote: On 18/11/2017 12:10 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:26, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 16/11/2017 1:55 am,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/17/2017 4:04 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 2:38:40 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: On 11/17/2017 1:17 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: *I think "must" is unwarranted, certainly in the case of the MWI. Rather, it ASSUMES all possible

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 18/11/2017 10:43 am, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 3:18:39 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote: On 18/11/2017 12:10 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:26, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 16/11/2017 1:55 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 2:38:40 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote: > > > > On 11/17/2017 1:17 PM, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > *I think "must" is unwarranted, certainly in the case of the MWI. Rather, > it ASSUMES all possible measurements must be realized in some world. I see > no reason for

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 3:18:39 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote: > > On 18/11/2017 12:10 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:26, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On 16/11/2017 1:55 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 15 Nov 2017, at 00:55, Bruce Kellett wrote: > > On 15/11/2017 12:47 am,

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

The only thing on this cold day that sets me to mind, is the silly notion of trade with other Earth's other H. Sapiens, or smart Neanderthal's in some fantasy ship. War, is possible, but unlikely, because, money, ya, know? Each Earth might exist in a lifeless expanse of 46 billion light years.

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 18/11/2017 12:10 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:26, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 16/11/2017 1:55 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at 00:55, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 15/11/2017 12:47 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 at 8:54 am, Bruce Kellett

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 18/11/2017 12:04 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:10, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/15/2017 7:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Nov 2017, at 21:15, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/14/2017 6:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Nov 2017, at 22:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 14/11/2017 2:07

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/17/2017 1:17 PM, agrayson2...@gmail.com wrote: *I think "must" is unwarranted, certainly in the case of the MWI. Rather, it ASSUMES all possible measurements must be realized in some world. I see no reason for this assumption other than an insistence to fully reify the wf in order to

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 2:17:37 PM UTC-7, agrays...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 11:30:04 AM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: >> >> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 1:57 AM, wrote: >> >> ​> ​ >>> I didn't mean to imply that all atoms in a baseball have

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Friday, November 17, 2017 at 11:30:04 AM UTC-7, John Clark wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 1:57 AM, > wrote: > > ​> ​ >> I didn't mean to imply that all atoms in a baseball have the same >> entangled state. >> > > ​Then a baseball is not in one ​ > definite state >

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 16-11-2017 07:32, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/15/2017 10:23 PM, smitra wrote: No time to find the right branch in this thread. Briefly the point I'm making is not really conditional on the details of quantum mechanics or the MWI, except that I'm assuming multiple worlds. The point is that

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 11/17/2017 5:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:10, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/15/2017 7:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Nov 2017, at 21:15, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/14/2017 6:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Nov 2017, at 22:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: On

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 1:57 AM, wrote: ​> ​ > I didn't mean to imply that all atoms in a baseball have the same > entangled state. > ​Then a baseball is not in one ​ definite state ​​. ​> > I just meant that whatever state it's in, it's not in contradiction with >

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:26, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 16/11/2017 1:55 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Nov 2017, at 00:55, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 15/11/2017 12:47 am, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 at 8:54 am, Bruce Kellett wrote: I don't think you

Re: Consistency of Postulates of QM

On 15 Nov 2017, at 22:10, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/15/2017 7:04 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 14 Nov 2017, at 21:15, Brent Meeker wrote: On 11/14/2017 6:18 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 13 Nov 2017, at 22:40, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 14/11/2017 2:07 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 12 Nov