On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 12:24 PM Alan Grayson <agrayson2...@gmail.com> wrote:
*> As I understand the UP, it's a statistical statement * No. It says the more exactly you specify the position of a particle the less exactly you can specify the velocity of the particle; or stated in a alternativ form, the shorter the time duration the more energy a particle (or even empty space) can have without detecting any violation of the law of conservation of energy. *> The UP follows from the postulates of QM. So if one assume these > postulates, there is indeed a proof of the UP.* I repeat, this is physics not mathematics, if an experiment violates somebody's postulates then that's just too bad for the postulates because experiment and observation is the ultimate authority in science. And, given that it can make predictions to 12 significant digits, experiment and observation tells us that virtual particles exist as unequivocally as science can tell us anything. 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAJPayv1z%2BSQySpEtR5UvfRSZUTds74vP2%3DavrNzdE4CDWhzhvw%40mail.gmail.com.
