Dear Lars-Göran and colleagues,
I think that probability amplitudes should have a single meaning as well
as any concept that our mind can invent. Heisenberg said in his Lectures
1955-1956 ”Physics and Philosophy”: “Descartes realizes that what we
know about our mind is more certain than what we
Brenner [joe.bren...@bluewin.ch]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 8:54 AM
To: Dino Buzzetti; Hans von Baeyer; fis
Subject: Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitudes
Dear Hans and Dino,
This is a direct question to both of you, to which I have not found a clear
answer: are value and amplitude the only
Dear Andrei, Hans and all
I agree with Andrei. And why make quantum theory more complex than it is? One
may use all kinds of mathematical tools in a scientific theory, and the more
these tools simplify calculations the better. I see no reason to avoid using
amplitudes or matrices in quantum
totally trivial.
Many thanks,
Joseph
- Original Message -
From: Lars-Göran Johanssonmailto:lars-goran.johans...@filosofi.uu.se
To: fis@listas.unizar.esmailto:fis@listas.unizar.es
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitudes
Dear Andrei, Hans and all
Dear Hans,
Thank you for your explanation about probability amplitudes,
that clarifies a lot. My only worry was about the *epistemological*
implications of quantum mechanics in its standard formulation,
that in my opinion point to a paradigm shift, which is felt not only
in this domain, but in
