**Stephen P. King** (*stephenk1@home.com*)

*Wed, 18 Aug 1999 16:36:34 -0400*

**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Next message:**WDEshleman@aol.com: "[time 572] Re: [time 546] Fermions & Bosons & Supersymmetry"**Previous message:**Stephen P. King: "[time 570] Re: [time 560] Zeno paradox, etc..."**In reply to:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 560] Zeno paradox, etc..."

Dear Youlian et al,

Youlian Troyanov wrote:

*>
*

*> Pretty close to Borges. I like your train of thought. Please elaborate
*

*> on how you understand the Chu connection to the Lexicons.
*

I found a neat statement by Ted Bastin that we can use, (note the

stared parts):

"... what is the $minimum$ that quantum theory has to take over from

classical thinking to get a particle trajectory? ...

1) The points must be $discriminable$. *One must be able to know one

from another.* (In the classical idea of a line, of course, one would

always be able to make measurements independently of of the definition

of the points which would settle at once the discriminability of the

points.)

2) The points will have to be $ordered$. *That is to say each point will

have to have a definite successor and a definite predecessor at any

given stage of building up of the line in order that meaning can be

attached to the instruction 'interpolate a point between two existing

ones'.*

3) There must be a 'topological cohesion' of the points. *It is this

property of topological cohesion that Landau and Lifschitz point out

degenerates as more and more precision is demanded in the localization

of points.*

Requirement number 3 is intuitive and it is not clear how to express it

exactly in general. However, there exists one special case in which it

can be given a clear meaning. This is the case of a 'space of potential

infinity' in which **a construction rule is defined for new points and

in which experimental discovery or 'observation' of the new points at

this abstract level is *identical with the construction process*. In

this special case the smoothness of the curve or 'tendency of the points

to keep together' is not something over and above the discriminating and

ordering of the points, but is the same process."**

Ted Bastin, "How does a particle get from A to B?" in Quantum Theory and

Beyond, edited by Ted Bastin. Cambridge U. Press, 1971, pg. 288-9

Onward,

Stephen

**Next message:**WDEshleman@aol.com: "[time 572] Re: [time 546] Fermions & Bosons & Supersymmetry"**Previous message:**Stephen P. King: "[time 570] Re: [time 560] Zeno paradox, etc..."**In reply to:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 560] Zeno paradox, etc..."

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3
on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:29 JST
*