Buddha Buck wrote:
Is it too late in this discussion to point out that, in non-perl
usage, eigenstates are associated with the operator, not with the
value fed into the operator?
[cut]
So asking for the eigenstates of a quantum superposition is asking the
wrong object for the property.
Probab
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 7:24 AM, Moritz Lenz wrote:
> On 10/22/2010 06:16 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
>> That is, a C<$value> is an eigenstate of a C<$junction> if-and-only-if:
>>
>> $value !~~ Junction && $value ~~ $junction
>
> In general this definition makes it impossible to return a list of
Food for thought, a few non-junction solutions:
On 10/22/2010 06:16 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> # Find the list of common elements in two lists...
> sub intersection (@list1, @list2) {
> (any(@list1) & any(@list2).eigenstates;
> }
sub intersection(@list1, @list2) {
uniq gat
On 11/01/2010 12:41 PM, Damian Conway wrote:
> Moritz wrote:
>
>>> $value !~~ Junction && $value ~~ $junction
>>
>> In general this definition makes it impossible to return a list of
>> eigenstates from the junction. Just think of junctions containing Code
>> objects.
>
> Well, that's a d
Moritz wrote:
>> $value !~~ Junction && $value ~~ $junction
>
> In general this definition makes it impossible to return a list of
> eigenstates from the junction. Just think of junctions containing Code
> objects.
Well, that's a deficiency in smartmatching: that Callable ~~ Code doesn't
ch
On 10/22/2010 06:16 AM, Damian Conway wrote:
> That is, a C<$value> is an eigenstate of a C<$junction> if-and-only-if:
>
> $value !~~ Junction && $value ~~ $junction
In general this definition makes it impossible to return a list of
eigenstates from the junction. Just think of junctions con
