Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #390120

Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical.

From The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity, rec.arts.sf.written
Subject Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical.
Date 2016-08-16 10:31 -0700
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <57B34DE8.6606@ix.netcom.com> (permalink)
References (7 earlier) <rcydneeMbtEJeDDKnZ2dnUU7_8xi4p2d@giganews.com> <vq32rbduq0c3oe4fmnqlaqigkne7gucfem@4ax.com> <nosh5a$6sq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <57b23ba8$0$43881$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com> <L6adnfd3M9JohS7KnZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw


Tom Roberts wrote:
> 
> On 8/15/16 8/15/16   5:01 PM, benj wrote:
> > The problem [...] isn't that people use statistics to obtain some measure of
> > knowledge where before there was total ignorance. The problem comes when one
> > starts saying that such probabilities are ALL that it is possible for humans to
> > know. How can any human make such a statement? What possible basis could one
> > have to justify it.
> 
> By having mathematical theorems that state that certain observable aspects of
> the world cannot be accurately described by models without inherent randomness
> [#]. And then observing those aspects. Look up the Bell inequalities and the
> various tests of them.
> 
>         [#] A summary of the theorems, not a statement of them.
> 
> > Superpowers are the only possible way one could know such a
> > thing.
> 
> "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." --
> Arthur C. Clarke.


I looked at your "sufficiently advanced technology", ...I opened up the
IBM PC,
looked inside...and there was no magic. It's junk now. All "sufficiently
advanced technology"
becomes just junk. 

But, but..if you're talking about "sufficiently advanced technology"
created by aliens from
outer space...sorry, i don't read science fiction books.

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-12 10:04 -0500
  Re: "Virtual Reality" is a _model_ of reality; even when it's poorly done. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-12 18:56 -0500
  Re: Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Michael J. Strickland <michael06582@comcast.net> - 2016-08-14 20:42 -0400
    Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-15 08:47 -0500
      Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-15 18:01 -0400
        Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-16 08:45 -0500
          Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-16 10:31 -0700
            Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-16 14:34 -0700
              Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-16 16:25 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-16 18:47 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-17 13:35 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-17 13:37 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-17 17:52 -0400
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2016-08-18 13:23 -0400
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 10:25 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-18 22:17 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-19 11:04 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-08-20 15:18 -0700
              Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-18 20:09 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-18 20:17 -0700
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-08-18 20:29 -0700
        Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-08-18 17:34 -0500
          Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-18 20:49 -0400
            Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-18 20:25 -0500
              Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-08-18 23:22 -0400
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-19 10:10 -0500
                Re: The ProbabilityWave is _virtual_, not physical. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-08-19 08:35 -0700
      Re: Reduce your meds. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-08-17 11:02 -0500

csiph-web