From: John Clark (jonkc@worldnet.att.net)
Date: Wed Aug 18 1999 - 11:25:35 MDT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Bryan Moss <bryan.moss@dial.pipex.com> Wrote:
>The most plausible alternative, imho, would be to assume that the
>wavefunction is not 'real'
The wavefunction is an abstraction that humans find useful in thinking
about things very small, it's as real as the lines of longitude and latitude.
Particles are real, certainly measurements are.
>and is a product of limited knowledge.
Bell's inequality has been experimentally proven to be false and that pretty
much torpedoes the hidden variable idea, certainly the loopholes are very
small and they seem to keep shrinking even more every year. Anyway, how
could you be proven wrong, all good scientific theories need a way to do
that. If you don't see interference bands many worlds is dead and Copenhagen
is possibly right, if you do see interference bands Copenhagen is dead and
many worlds is probably correct.
There are only two possible outcomes, what's your prediction, do we get
interference bands or not, how do you place your bet?
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.5
iQA/AwUBN7rsj9+WG5eri0QzEQIdOwCgpqjKkvkFC3vqBh7nJjZOzZ1sHxsAoNKC
OR27qNBGyTQirCYC60UzVT+4
=uW3k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:48 MST