HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
Subject: Re: QM non-causal?
Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 20:58:40 GMT

In article <Dec.11.20.57.12.1992.6704@ruhets.rutgers.edu> bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner) writes:
>mcirvin@husc8.harvard.edu (Matt McIrvin) writes:
>
>>mkagalen@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (michael kagalenko) writes:
>>>["many worlds" interpretation lacks]
>>> ... originality as well. I've read the story (by Marquez, I believe), 
>>>where this idea was presented in an interesting way.
>
>>Jorge Luis Borges, perhaps?  I think it was called "The Garden of 
>>Forking Paths."
>
>>Olaf Stapledon describes a similar idea quite casually near the end
>>of "Star Maker."
>
>Do you know, I've read "The Garden of Forking Paths" many times, the 
>first long before I knew any quantum, and I never made the association
>between it and the "many worlds" bastardization.  Now every time I read
>that story, I'm going to think of that idiocy.  I wish you hadn't
>pointed this out.

Don't blame Matt.  You would have certainly run into this eventually,
because it appears in the book "The Many Worlds Interpretation of
Quantum Mechanics" (in one of the dopey sections) and the similarity is
frequently discussed.  
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: mkagalen@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (michael kagalenko)
Subject: Re: QM non-causal?
Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 05:54:46 GMT

In article <Dec.11.20.57.12.1992.6704@ruhets.rutgers.edu> bweiner@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Benjamin Weiner) writes:
>mcirvin@husc8.harvard.edu (Matt McIrvin) writes:
>
>>mkagalen@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (michael kagalenko) writes:
>>>["many worlds" interpretation lacks]
>>> ... originality as well. I've read the story (by Marquez, I believe), 
>>>where this idea was presented in an interesting way.
>
>>Jorge Luis Borges, perhaps?  I think it was called "The Garden of 
>>Forking Paths."
Yes, surely, sorry, too bad mistake :->

>
>>Olaf Stapledon describes a similar idea quite casually near the end
>>of "Star Maker."
>
>Do you know, I've read "The Garden of Forking Paths" many times, the 
>first long before I knew any quantum, and I never made the association
>between it and the "many worlds" bastardization.  Now every time I read
>that story, I'm going to think of that idiocy.  I wish you hadn't
>pointed this out.

Too late - try another universe, where it wasn't pointed out.
From: tao@fine.princeton.edu (Terry Tao)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: TIME HAS INERTIA.  (A3) DEDUCES (A5)!
Keywords: (A3), (A1), SECURITY,  TENDENCY OF MAINTAINING THE STATUS QUO
Date: 13 Dec 92 18:53:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: Princeto.1992Dec13.185314.27473
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

I HAVE DISCOVERED THE FOLLOWING AMAZING COROLLARY TO (A3).  IT IS AN
AMAZING CONTRAST TO A2, AND IT IS A SIMPLE DEDUCTION FROM (A3).

(And I will humbly use the A prefix instead of T)

(A5)  TIME HAS NEGATIVE INERTIA, AND ENERGY INCREASES AS ONE GETS FURTHER
AND FURTHER AWAY FROM THE BIG BANG

I HAVE THE FOLLOWING EXPLANATION FOR THIS.  BECAUSE OF A3, ALL ACTIONS OF
THE UNIVERSE ARE TO GET SECURITY.  BUT WHAT BETTER WAY TO GET SECURITY THAN
POWER!! AND POWER IS JUST ANOTHER WORD FOR ENERGY.  SO:

THE AIM OF THE UNIVERSE IS TO GET MORE ENERGY.

BUT ENERGY IS DISSAPATED BY TIME.  SO TIME IS THE ENEMY OF THE UNIVERSE.

NOW THE UNIVERSE IS STRONG.  THERE CAN BE NO OBJECT STRONGER THAN THE
UNIVERSE, BECAUSE ANY OBJECT IS OF COURSE CONTAINED IN THE UNIVERSE AND IS
WEAKER.  HENCE THE UNIVERSE MUST HAVE THE POWER TO FIGHT THE INTRUSION OF
TIME.

THEREFORE, I CONTEND THAT THE ORIGINAL TIME, THE ONE WHICH DRAINS ENERGY,
HAS BEEN DESTROYED AND REPLACED BY UNIVERSAL TIME, WHICH HELPS THE UNIVERSE
INSTEAD OF WEAKENS IT.  AND IT IS PERFECTLY REASONABLE FOR THERE TO HAVE
BEEN TWO TIMES, FOR AFTER ALL, IF ORIGINAL TIME HAD INERTIA, IT MUST BE
MOVING, AND TO BE MOVING IT MUST BE MOVING IN SOME TIME FRAME, WHICH IS OF
COURSE UNIVERSAL TIME.  UNIVERSAL TIME IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF ORIGINAL
TIME, AND SO WILL ACCUMULATE ENERGY INSTEAD OF DESTROYING IT.

ALSO, THE PRINCIPLE OF DUAL TIMES EXPLAINS THE BIG BANG.  BEFORE THE BIG
BANG, TIME FOLLOWED "ORIGINAL TIME" STRUCTURE.  AT THE POINT OF THE BIG
BANG, THE NEW TIME TOOK OVER, AND ALL THE INERTIA OF THE ORIGINAL TIME WAS
EXPENDED IN A HUGE EXPLOSION: THE BIG BANG.

THE TOTAL ENERGY IN THE UNIVERSE IS INCREASING RIGHT NOW.  STARS PRODUCE
LIGHT, BUT NOT FORM THEIR OWN FUEL, CONTRARY TO ASTRONOMER's VIEWS, IT IS
FROM THE ACTION OF UNIVERSAL TIME.  THE STARS DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THEIR
SUPPLIES OF FUEL SO THEY TAKE THE MOST SECURE OPTION, WHICH IS TO TAP THE
RESOURCES OF UNIVERSAL TIME.

I HUMBLY PROPOSE THAT A5 BE ADDED TO THE LIST OF ABIAN'S PRINCIPLES.

Terry

;-) FTHI
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: m14494@mwvm.mitre.org (Mike White)
Subject: Re: Why is the sky blue?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 13:54:57 GMT

> In that case the classical Rayleigh theory ...
> ... x = 2 pi a / lambda...
> ...spectrum of the sun convolved with a fourth-power law...
> Rayleigh scattering...

All this talk about scattering etc. just misses the point.  We all
understand *how* the sky is blue, but the question is *why*?
The mechanism that makes it blue is clear, but why does that
mechanism exist instead of one that makes it, say, green?  Yes,
yes, I know: "physics describes, it does not explain".  I've always
found that answer to be a cop-out (as we used to say back in the
60s).  I think "why" is an excellent question.

************************
* These are my opinions only.*
************************
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: Michael Steckner <steckner@lri.uwo.ca>
Subject: THANKS:scientists who write literature
Organization: Relayed-by-Sendmail
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 22:28:02 GMT
To: sci.physics@julian.uwo.ca

I would like to thank everyone that responded to my question. There response
was overwhelming! The English Prof is getting a good laugh out of some of
the responses.

Hope everyone has a good holiday!

Michael
From: tabitha@vms.huji.ac.il
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: quantum cosmology
Date: 16 Dec 92 19:59:18 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

In article <1992Dec14.194012.20679@galois.mit.edu>, jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez) writes:
> In article <1992Dec13.171644.74@vms.huji.ac.il> tabitha@vms.huji.ac.il writes:
>>A question about quantum cosmology from a non-physicist.
>>
>>If space and time came into existence with the big bang, in
>>what would the quantum fluctuation have occured?
>
> This is one of those questions they only tell you the answer to when you
> get your PhD, and they make you promise not to tell anyone.



Funny.
I'm going to spend the first night of Hannuka at the home
of Dr. Gerald Schroeder, who got his phd is physics from
MIT, a school probably familiar to you.

He said they forgot to tell him the answer when he got his
doctorate.

-dennis
Newsgroups: sci.physics,alt.psychology.personality,sci.engr
From: crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass)
Subject: Re: Richard P. Feynman
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:38:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.013103.29167@netcom.com> noring@netcom.com (Jon Noring) writes:
>In article schumach@convex.com (Richard A. Schumacher) writes:
>
>>>but I was.  I don't see why I can't enjoy (and understand) both Hannah 
>>>Arendt and Oppenheimer or Feynman.  Please recall that Mr. Feynman 
>>>specialized in physics but also painted and played the bongos, among many 
>>>other endeavours not normally associated with 'scientists'.
>>
>>Not true!. Many scientists are interested in and appreciative of the arts.
>>You must be thinking of engineers.
>
>
>I believe there is a lot of truth to this.  I work with a lot of engineers,
>and the real nuts'n'bolts type are, *on the average*, and with notable
>exceptions, much more likely to be not interested in the arts than those who
>can be called scientists (the distinction between engineers and scientists can
>be blurry if you consider field of study alone - generally Ph.D. engineers are
>more likely to be "scientifically oriented", to be much more intuitive.)

     Yup, dem dere nutsy boltsy types are much less likely to like art.
     It says that right here on the back of this book marked 'preconceived
     notions'.

     Or is it that they are more discriminating?

     I really love it when people start picking on engineers like
     it is a species rather than a profession.  I've known engineers
     that were artists and engineers with the personality of a toad;
     I've also known english majors that were artists and english majors
     with the personality of a toad; not that those are the only
     two valid choices, of course, nor are they even exclusive, since I've
     known an artist with the personality of a toad.

     Should I be flattered that you 'allowed' PhD-level engineers to 
     be in the same artsy class as 'real scientists'?  Or irritated?
     Next time I see a Pieta should I go *wow* a bit more loudly to retain my 
     'credentials'?  Should I stop sniggering when see a wall covered
     with a blank canvas entitled 'Untitled #6'?   How about when a 
     toilet seat goes for over a hundred grand?

     Exactly how pretentious must we be to belong to the 'club'?  And
     do the 'real artsy types' let 'real scientists' in theirs?  I await
     further stereotyping with interest.

     Amused,

                              dale bass

-- 
C. R. Bass                                          crb7q@virginia.edu        
Department of Mechanical, 
     Aerospace and Nuclear Engineering
University of Virginia                              (804) 924-7926
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: bcannard@hppcb36.mentorg.com (The Human Mi-Go)
Subject: Re: How does Superman create thrust? (WAS Re: The Batman Light: How
Originator: bcannard@hppcb36
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 08:21:21 GMT
Reply-To: bob_cannard@mentorg.com
Organization: Best Buy Byakhees Inc.
Keywords: 
Followup-To: 


In article <3319@ucl-cs.uucp>, G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly) writes:
|> 
|> He was brought up on Kryton, which was much more massive than Earth,
|> 
|> Hence his superstrength and flying powers.
|> 
|> 
|> Gordon Joly      Phone  +44 71 387 7050 ext 3703      FAX  +44 71 387 1397
|> Internet: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk        UUCP: ...!{uunet,uknet}!ucl-cs!G.Joly
|> Computer Science, University College London, Gower Street, LONDON WC1E 6BT
|> 

Except:

(a) He loses his strength under a red sun, even with Earth-normal gravity.

(b) He loses his strength when he visits the miniaturised Kryptonian
    city he keeps in a bottle in the Fortress of Solitude.

(c) A small piece of Kryptonite of the appropriate colour (red? I forget)
    annibilates his super-strength.

Check your back issues if you don't believe it. Empirical, reproducible
evidence!

DISCLAIMER: It's a long time since I read this stuff, maybe DC have changed
	the rules. These days I only read intellectual magazines like Batman.

NOTE FOR THE HUMOUR CHALLENGED: You still here?

-- 
bob_cannard@mentorg.com			"More dynamite!" - Theron Marks
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: scip1061@nuscc.nus.sg (Marc Paul Jozef)
Subject: Re: Can space-time intersect itself?
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 12:05:57 GMT

: G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly) writes:
: 
: The answer probably lies in superstring theory...


    Certainly not.
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: wtyler@adobe.com (William Tyler)
Subject: Re: Cappucino Noise
Followup-To: sci.physics
Organization: Adobe Systems Inc., Mountain View, CA
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 01:08:14 GMT

In article <1415@kepler1.rentec.com> andrew@rentec.com (Andrew Mullhaupt) writes:
>When you run steam through milk with a cappucino machine, you get a
>characteristic noise which steadily drops in pitch.
>
>Explain this noise. Is it the same noise as you get running hot water
>from the tap?

My guess: 

The milk container is similar to an organ pipe, closed at one end and
open at the other. The fundamental resonant waveform is 1/4 of a
wavelength, but the frequency of this wave depends on the speed of
sound in the medium. As you steam the milk, the liquid fills with
small bubbles of air, thereby lowering the speed of sound in the
medium, and consequently the sound lowers in pitch. 

Complications include that the container doesn't start out full, and
that the top of the milk/air mixture moves up as the milk foams.

Bill


-- 
Bill Tyler      wtyler@adobe.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian)
Subject:  TIME HAS INERTIA -  OBEY ANF FOLLOW  ALEXANDER ABIAN 
Summary: ABIANT REPLIES TO B. RIEMERS
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 22:44:04 GMT



                                       12-13-92
   
Dear Mr. Riemsrs,

You write:

In article <BCR.92Dec13134531@hfl3sn02.cern.ch> bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers) writes:
>In article <21765.723981323@jinr.dubna.su> vignat@lnp01.jinr.dubna.su writes:
>
>>  Don't consider please my little remark as an intention to share your
>>  Nobel Prize. I am absolutely sure, that it is you, who should get it.
>
>I admit I was playing this game just as hard as everyone else.  i.e.
>Inflatting Alexander's ego by pretending to go along with him, and
>then presenting a new arguement to see how he would react.  However,
>it is now clear to me that this is long past the point of being funny.
>This person has serious problems and we are only making him worse!
>Unfortunately, there is no way we can get help for Alexander Abian,
>so our best bet is to ignore him until he gets borred with this
>idea.  Then he may seek out help, or he may pick-up on another 
>bizzare idea.  However, maybe next time he will pick a way of
>presenting his idea that allow people to force him to get help.
>
>                           Bill

     My answer is:

     THE  FEELING IS MUTUAL

With love                                       Alexander Abian



-- 
   The tendency of maintaining the status-quo, Reaction to provocation and
                The tendency of maintaining again a status-quo.  
    TIME HAS INERTIA  and some energy is lost to move Time forward  
  E = mcc  (Einstein)    must be replaced by    E = m(0) exp(-At) (Abian)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: sehari@iastate.edu (Babak Sehari)
Subject: Re: Reluctant call for moderation of sci.physics
Originator: sehari@class1.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 05:50:14 GMT

In <13DEC199211444059@utahep.uta.edu> sawyer@utahep.uta.edu (Lee Sawyer) writes:

>     I have in the past thought that sci.physics should be unmoderated. The
>current flood of Abianology has caused me to change my mind. Is it possible to
>switch this to a _loosely_ moderated newsgoup for, say, six months, then 
>switch it back to unmoderated when the wackos have either calmed down or
>popped a blood vessel ?

Absolutely not. 

>    Short of this, can anyone suggest a way in VNEWS to tailor a kill file
>to filter the TIME HAS INERTIA postings ? Could a script be written that
>automatically redirects these to alt.physics.new-theories (or whatever that 
>group is called) ?

use the next command, or view it by title and choose which one do you
want to read.  You do not have to read everything.

                    With highest regards,
                         Babak   Sehari.

-- 
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian)
Subject: TIME HAS INERTIA   Re: KILLFILE  instruction
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 02:42:33 GMT

                  12-15-92


There were several requests how to put
     
       TIME HAS INERTIA  

on KILL FILE.

   One way is to put on your KILLFILE :     
               /abian/h:j

That would almost  definitely  KILL (I hope) anything  posted by me.


   I would like to stress again that  I (almost very, very exclusively)

read and post ONLY in  TIME HAS INERTIA   and prefer very much to receive
messages  on TIME HAS INERTIA  and not necessarily by e-mail.


   Also,  I  did not cross-post  TIME HAS INERTIA  in sci.chem  or
   sci.bio  or sci.math - not that I would not have done if I wanted to!

   I really would prefer receiving postings in TIME HAS INERTIA
   only by those people who are seriously interested in my ideas,
   in developing and applying them.  Especially  the  items
   TIME HAS INERTIA  and  (A1), (A3) and (A4). 
    
     With love,                          Alexander Abian



-- 
   The tendency of maintaining the status-quo, Reaction to provocation and
                The tendency of maintaining again a status-quo.  
    TIME HAS INERTIA  and some energy is lost to move Time forward  
  E = mcc  (Einstein)    must be replaced by    E = m(0) exp(-At) (Abian)
From: baylissb@topaz.ucq.edu.au
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Where is background energy going?
Date: 14 Dec 92 20:29:52 AET
Organization: University of Central Queensland, Australia

In article <1992Dec12.215859.22026@netcom.com>, rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
> An interesting question came up on an unlikely mailing list.  We observe
> that the wavelength of the background radiation has decreased as the 
> universe has expanded.  This implies loss of energy does it not?
> Where is that energy going and what is the vehicle of interchange.
> Photons don't emit photons and energy transfer must be quantized
> according to QM.  (John Baez, I would particularly appreciate a
> response from you)

Forgetting about GM (as I have not looked into it yet), but with my background
in optics, I would guess that the refractive index of the university is
changing.

If this is the case, then energy would not be lost, but explains the change in
frequency of the wavelenght being considered (sorry if i misinterrupted your
question).


barry...

========================================================================
The above are only ideas, treat them as such.
========================================================================
Do not condemn the judgement of   |  If it can't be understood, it's not     
another because it differs from   |  finished yet.                             
your own. You may both be wrong.  |                                             
                                  |                -Paul Herbig              
		-Dandemis         |                                     
                                  |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

> 
> Bob
> -- 
> Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007
> 
>     'The meek shall inherit the earth--the rest of us will move on..'
>                                                     Sameer Parekh
> 
> 
>                PGP 1.0 or 2.0 public key available on request.
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: matmcinn@nuscc.nus.sg (Brett McInnes)
Subject: Re: How does Superman create thrust? (WAS Re: The Batman Light: How
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:02:37 GMT

G.Joly@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Gordon Joly) writes:
: 
: He was brought up on Kryton, which was much more massive than Earth,
: 
: Hence his superstrength and flying powers.
: 
: 
That's "Krap-ton".
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: polowin@chem.queensu.ca (Joel Polowin)
Subject: Re: TIME HAS INERTIA. SURRENDER TO (A1),(A2),(A3),(A4) NO OTHER WAY
Keywords: GAINING A FEELING OF SECURITY - THE SOLE MOTIVATING FORCE  12-11-92
Organization: Dept. of Chemistry, Queen's University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 19:24:42 GMT

In article <abian.724120186@pv343f.vincent.iastate.edu> abian@iastate.edu (Alexander Abian) writes:

> You have to surrender to (A3), you have to introduce (A3) as the prime
>principle of Physics as the CORNERSTONE of modern PHYSICS .  You have no
>other choice!

How could we have missed it?  "Resistance is USELESS!!"  Abian's a
Vogon, and we've been treated to some of his poetry...

Joel Polowin
polowin@silicon.chem.queensu.ca, polowin@chem.queensu.ca,
polowinj@qucdn.queensu.ca
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: dseeman@novell.com (Daniel Seeman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: TIME HAS INERTIA - ABIAN REPEATS overwhelmingly demanded (A3)
Keywords: attn: CHINTER, SITES TAO, WATTS
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:00:18 GMT
Organization: Novell Inc., San Jose, Califonia

True geniuses do not profess their status as such.  In fact, a genius may not 
know she is in such a catagory.  For the more you know, the more you must know. 
Or rather the thirst to know hightens with every bit of knowledge one takes in.

This is why I am suspicious of Abian.  Anyone who calls themself a genius is
either joking, or has serious dilusions of their own self worth.

Give it a break Abian...We have had enough.

dks
Newsgroups: sci.physics
From: matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Exam suggestions :-)
Followup-To: sci.physics
Date: 15 Dec 92 12:15:53
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: jarleb@athena.uio.no's message of Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:34:30 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.163430.5156@ulrik.uio.no> jarleb@athena.uio.no (Jarle Brinchmann) writes:

> This is a (rather amusing IMHO) suggestion for exams:
> Please read it, I had a hard time writing it in :-)
> 
> (BTW it's taken from H. J. Limpkin. Journal of Irreproducible 
> Results 7. 12 (1958) and NABLADET March 1991)

Harry Lipkin, actually: one of the great jokers of theoretical
physics.  (He does serious physics too; he's rather good at it...)  I
recently saw another spoof by him: a proposal to measure the mass of
the neutrino by threshold studies of p pbar -> nu nubar, using a
liquid uranium calorimeter.

You can find this article in (where else?) _A Random Walk in Science_;
it has a few other good Harry Lipkin pieces in there too.  One of my
favorites is "A high-energy physics coloring book"; I really ought to
put that one up in my office.  "These are experimental points in a
Feynman diagram.  Connect them with the appropriate solid, dashed, and
wavy lines.  Color it in a gauge-invariant way."
--
Matthew Austern                   Just keep yelling until you attract a
(510) 644-2618                    crowd, then a constituency, a movement, a
austern@lbl.bitnet                faction, an army!  If you don't have any
matt@physics.berkeley.edu         solutions, become a part of the problem!
Xref: sparky sci.physics:21071 sci.math:16829
From: srctran@world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math
Subject: Re: Bayes' theorem and QM
Date: 14 Dec 92 03:16:23 GMT
	<1992Dec11.220139.14066@newshost.lanl.gov>
	<1992Dec13.204233.10835@galois.mit.edu>
	<1992Dec14.003452.12884@galois.mit.edu>
Organization: The World

Speaking of Bayes Theorem, one theorem I never see mentioned in many of
these discussions, and I am almost afraid to mention it (since it can
spawn many pseudo theories) is a theorem due to Gregory Chaitin at IBM,
who proves that if you accept the basic properties of Integers, then it
follows (in a very pretty argument) that statements about reality are 
all probabilistic, that any theory that uses the integers implicitly
is bringing in randomness  (or that's how I interpret his work).

One could argue that some of the probability that comes into play with
quantum theories comes from the fact that physicists use integers to
experiment and predict, that there is an unstated axiom in physics that
things are probabilistic.

I know I am mishandling his ideas greatly, and would appreciate it if
some of the theorists could read his work and see if there is any relevance
to the axioms of physics.  If nothing else, his papers are great reading.

Greg Aharonian
Source Translation & Optimization
-- 
**************************************************************************
Greg Aharonian
Source Translation & Optimiztion
P.O. Box 404, Belmont, MA 02178
Newsgroups: sci.physics