*WDEshleman@aol.com*

*Fri, 5 Nov 1999 03:29:34 EST*

**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Next message:**Matti Pitkänen: "[time 977] Re: Physics and prime numbers (!)"**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 975] Re: [time 974] Re: [time 970] LaTex version of my paper"**In reply to:**WDEshleman@aol.com: "[time 974] Re: [time 970] LaTex version of my paper"

Hitoshi,

The Nov. 5 update is now at,

http://members.tripod.com/~EshlemanW/dlpage.htm

I have changed f_{n+1} to f_1 and f_n to f_0 as you noted.

The equations are now numbered to help discussion.

When it comes to implications of quantum mechanics, I wish to discuss them

in section 12; section 2 may now have all that I can say about exp function.

I am still having some trouble with objective and subjective; since our

instruments

and eyes see interference patterns, does that make them objective? Or, are

the patterns caused by subjective change that we can't miss objectively?

Sincerely,

Bill

In a message dated 11/4/99 8:53:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,

hitoshi@kitada.com writes:

*>
*

*> Dear Bill,
*

*>
*

*> I saw your new version of Nov. 4. I still have a question on section 2:
*

*>
*

*> The second equation for f_n:
*

*>
*

*> df_n/dt = h f_n (2)
*

*>
*

*> is equivalent to
*

*>
*

*> f_n = c exp(th) with c an arbitrary but fixed constant. (2)'
*

*>
*

*> Namely this gives the general solution for (2).
*

*>
*

*> But unlike you say there, f_{n+1} = f_n exp(th) is not the solution of (2)
*

*> because by (2)' we have
*

*>
*

*> f_{n+1} = f_n exp(th) = c exp(2th),
*

*>
*

*> which satisfies
*

*>
*

*> df_{n+1}/dt = 2h f_{n+1}.
*

*>
*

*> I wonder why you need subscript n, which, I assume, takes integral values
*

1,

*> 2,
*

*> 3, ...
*

*>
*

*> I think you need just two quantities, say f_0 and f_1 that satisfy, e.g.,
*

*>
*

*> f_1/f_0 = 1/(1-x)
*

*>
*

*> in the case of relativistic/objective notion of change at the bottom of
*

page

*> 4.
*

*> In the case of exponential function case, this would become
*

*>
*

*> f_1/f_0 = a constant,
*

*>
*

*> if f_1 should satisfy the same equation (2) as for f_0. Namely the
*

*> exponential
*

*> case is the extremal case where there is no substantial change between
*

*> subjective and objective values. And you seem to attempt to find some
*

*> non-extremal but more moderate case/view to the subjective change in your
*

*> present paper...
*

*>
*

*> Best wishes,
*

*> Hitoshi
*

*>
*

**Next message:**Matti Pitkänen: "[time 977] Re: Physics and prime numbers (!)"**Previous message:**Hitoshi Kitada: "[time 975] Re: [time 974] Re: [time 970] LaTex version of my paper"**In reply to:**WDEshleman@aol.com: "[time 974] Re: [time 970] LaTex version of my paper"

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3
on Wed Dec 01 1999 - 01:15:39 JST
*