Re: subjective reality

From: <kurtleegod.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:48:10 -0400

Hi Lee,

  As much as I sympathise with your call for preservation of naive
realism
 and agree entirely with your opinion on the demerits of introspection
 I have to take issue with half of what you say below:

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Lee Corbin <lcorbin.domain.name.hidden>
 ...

>I'm not too sure what you mean by "to embed". If we are seeking to
*explain*
>---if that is what you mean---then we cannot explain QM by classical
physics,
>but we *can* explain classical physics by QM. (I take our primary
activity to
>be---and the activity I'm most interesting in participating
in---*explaining*.)

 ...

 Lee

  Yes we cannot explain QM by classical physics but NEITHER can we
explain
 from QM the classical world we know and love with its well defined and
  assigned elements of (naive) physical reality that you so much
cherish, I am afraid!
 If we did there would not be no Measurement Problem, no spooky
  long-distance correlations, no zombie Schrodinger Cat's around to
haunt us...

 You see, amplitudes don't just add! They also multiply and square!

 I hope this does not add to your grumpiness. The miracle of experience
 you talk about is still there, of course. Even more so, perhaps.

 Regards,

 Godfrey Kurtz
 (New Brunswick, NJ)





________________________________________________________________________
Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and
industry-leading spam and email virus protection.
Received on Wed Aug 17 2005 - 11:50:56 PDT