**Hitoshi Kitada** (*hitoshi@kitada.com*)

*Sat, 9 Oct 1999 13:25:07 +0900*

**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Next message:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 919] Re: [time 914] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 917] Re: [time 913] RE: [time 912] Re: [time 911] RE: [time 910] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"**In reply to:**Ben Goertzel: "[time 913] RE: [time 912] Re: [time 911] RE: [time 910] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"**Next in thread:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 919] Re: [time 914] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"

Dear Matti,

I understand that you are talking in p-adic context, and as such the present

proof does not harm your result.

I do not want to disturb your satisfaction with your proof. Just I would like

to conclude with a comment that the existence of the limit lim

(1+R_0(z)V)^{-1} = lim R(z)(H_0-z) = lm (1-R(z)V): \HH_- -->\HH_- when Im z->0

is the main issue, and if this is solved, the unitarity holds also in real

case.

Best wishes,

Hitoshi

**Next message:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 919] Re: [time 914] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 917] Re: [time 913] RE: [time 912] Re: [time 911] RE: [time 910] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"**In reply to:**Ben Goertzel: "[time 913] RE: [time 912] Re: [time 911] RE: [time 910] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"**Next in thread:**Matti Pitkanen: "[time 919] Re: [time 914] Re: [time 909] About your proof of unitarity"

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3
on Sun Oct 17 1999 - 22:40:47 JST
*