Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

31826The paper

Expand Messages
  • bhvwd
    Dec 28, 2004
      Mary, I read the paper and it seems I must be in a nearly transed
      mind frame to begin to synthesize what he is talking about.
      His statement that we never interact directly with quantum states
      leaves me with a feeling of being manipulated by probability
      distributions I do not select. It is as if only classical states can
      be gleaned from any observation. This seems very predeterministic.
      In such a case our own selection of observation through genetic
      darwanism would preclude free will and force us to the "right road"
      of discovery. In this case a preclivity such as Bookdocs interest
      would be predetermined as a pointed state and force him into a
      determined and proper state as derived by an irrational and oddly
      selected quantum information spectrum. Why the collapse of competing
      probabilities? Then again there is so much observational material
      that is flawed from a classical viewpoint. Because an observation
      survives are we to grant it validity? In the biblical loaves and
      fishes observation the deciples hand out food from no apparent
      source. That story has been repeated billions of times , still
      impresses billions of minds, is derived from observation and is
      bogus from the classical concepts of acquisation.
      The author calls the paper an existential construct but in many
      ways it makes us the whores of the irrational . Then again a
      probability distrabution is also an observation of an idea in
      graphic or numerical notation. We are relying on a guess about a
      guess. Bill
    • Show all 3 messages in this topic