On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote:
>> With Quantum Mechanics NOTHING is a wave function, that is to say no >> observable quantity is. The wave function is a calculation device of no >> more reality than lines of longitude and latitude. If you want to talk >> about reality you've got to SQUARE the wave function, and even then all you >> get is a probability not a certainty; not only that but the wave function >> contains imaginary numbers so 2 different wave functions can yield the >> exact same probability when you square it. >> > > > Sure, I agree if you want to define 'things' as decoherence > I define a "thing" as anything observable; it's what most people mean when they say something like "concrete reality". > rather than the wave functions that decohere to produce them. That's > standard QM. I'm just using common parlance. > Quantum Mechanics can be formulated in a way that makes no use of wave functions whatsoever, in fact that was the way Heisenberg originally did it. It was only 6 months later that Schrodinger came up with his wave equation. Both methods come up with the exact same probability prediction and which method used in the calculation is entirely a matter of personal taste. And there is no arguing in matters of taste. > But this is irrelevant to my points. > Your point was "everything is a wavefunction" and your point was about as far from the truth as it's possible to get. John K Clark -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
