As an exercise I've been trying to pinpoint exactly what is wrong with
Plaga's paper. For anyone who doubts that it *is* wrong, note that it
proposed 10 years ago an experiment which he said was feasible with what
was then state-of-the-art equipment. This technology has now massively
Paddy Leahy writes:
As an exercise I've been trying to pinpoint exactly what is wrong with
Plaga's paper On careful reading, the paper is just littered with
confusions and errors Hence, if we saw what he predicted, we would
actually *disprove* MWI QM, not confirm it as he thinks.
You're welcome, Lee.
- Original Message -
From: Lee Corbin
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Plaga
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 22:04:19 -0700
I could not find who suggested Plaga's paper recently, but
thanks to whoever it was. Whether Plaga is right or wrong,
his
Message - BRFrom: Bruno Marchal [EMAIL
PROTECTED]BRTo: aet.radal ssg [EMAIL PROTECTED]BRSubject: Re: Plaga
BRDate: Wed, 25 May 2005 20:40:21 +0200 BRBRgt; BRgt; BRgt; Le
25-mai-05, à 17:59, aet.radal ssg a écrit : BRgt; BRgt; gt; From the
initial page from the included link
Ha, ha.
- Original Message -
From: Saibal Mitra
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Plaga
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 18:50:01 +0200
Bruno was quoting another Aet from a parallel world :)
Quoting Eugen Leitl :
If you expect to be quoted correctly, stop posting
At 06:58 PM 5/24/2005, rmiller wrote:
In a recent post (5/24) I wrote. . .
I would suggest re Plaga or anyone else discussed here, it's not the time
spent in a particular academic trench that makes the idea great, it's the
quality of the insight.
As luck, coincidence or a wide specious
: http://www.hillscapital.com/antispam/
- Oorspronkelijk bericht -
Van:
aet.radal
ssg
Aan: everything-list@eskimo.com
Verzonden: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 05:59
PM
Onderwerp: Re: Plaga
From the initial page from the included link to the archive: "I'm no
phys
aet.radal ssg wrote:
From the initial page from the included link to the archive: I'm no
physicist so I don't know for sure that these implications would
follow, but I am very doubtful that interworld communication is consistent
with the basics of quantum mechanics. The fact that this paper
Le 25-mai-05, à 17:59, aet.radal ssg a écrit :
From the initial page from the included link to the archive: I'm no
physicist so I don't know for sure that these implications would
follow, but I am very doubtful that interworld communication is
consistent
with the basics of quantum mechanics.
PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 5:51 PM
To: everything-list@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Plaga
We discussed Plaga's paper back in June, 2002. I reported some skeptical
analysis of the paper by John Baez of sci.physics fame, at
http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m3686.html . I also gave some
) on it. As for
astute knowledge in the QM Codex being a requirement, I seem to recall
that, before Ed Whitten took an interest in physics, his undergrad degree
was in History. Einstein was a---well, we all know what Einstein was
during his miracle year.*
I would suggest re Plaga or anyone else
We discussed Plaga's paper back in June, 2002. I reported some skeptical
analysis of the paper by John Baez of sci.physics fame, at
http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m3686.html . I also gave some
reasons of my own why arbitrary inter-universe quantum communication
should be impossible.
Hal
At 07:51 PM 5/24/2005, Hal Finney wrote:
We discussed Plaga's paper back in June, 2002. I reported some skeptical
analysis of the paper by John Baez of sci.physics fame, at
http://www.escribe.com/science/theory/m3686.html . I also gave some
reasons of my own why arbitrary inter-universe
13 matches
Mail list logo
