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
ally wrong nor
totally trivial.
Many thanks,
Joseph
- Original Message -
From: Lars-Göran Johansson<mailto:lars-goran.johans...@filosofi.uu.se>
To: fis@listas.unizar.es<mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 12:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitud
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 t
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 Hans,
I would like just to point that 99,99% of people working
in quantum theory would say that the complex amplitude of
quantum probability is the main its intrinsic property, so
if you try to exclude amplitudes from the model
you can in principle do this and this is well known
lo
wishes,
Joseph
- Original Message -
From: Dino Buzzetti
To: Hans von Baeyer ; fis
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 3:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Fis] Probability Amplitudes
Dear Hans,
Thank you for your explanation about probability amplitudes,
that clarifies a lot. My
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 al
