From: "@adelphia.com   
      
   David Mitchell wrote:   
   > On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:19:04 -0500, remove wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   >>David Mitchell wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 09:27:13 -0500, remove wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>>David Mitchell wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:23:45 -0500, remove wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>But information can, go faster then the speed of light.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>Not in any way that can be used to transfer information, otherwise it   
   >>>would violate GR, I am told.   
   >>>   
   >>>You could argue that the value of the properties being measured is   
   >>>transferred; but that can't be used (by us) to convey information.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >>As I said;   
   >>You can not have the comfortable Newtonian world where everything that   
   >>happens is predictable and where one measurement site could not affect   
   >>another set of measurements being preformed light years away, at a   
   >>distance that a light-signal could not bridge.   
   >>   
   >>You need me to rephrase this?   
   >   
   >   
   > You could; but it would be a waste of time, since you haven't addressed   
   > the point: which is that information cannot travel faster than light in   
   > any way that we can use.   
   >   
   > Aspect's experiments showed that EPR is "real"; but that has no bearing on   
   > what _you_ consider to be the underlying mechanisms of QM.   
   >   
   > You have still to answer why you think that the Copenhagen Interpretation   
   > is necessarily correct, and precisely what that has to do with OBE's; but   
   > I'm beginning to suspect that you're probably just a troll, (maybe even   
   > one we've seen before, using, another, different nym).   
   >   
   > If you'd like to discuss the issues, I'm all for it; but if you just want   
   > to waltz in and toss a few insults around, I already _have_ people to do   
   > that, thank you, and I'd like to welcome you into my killfile.   
   >   
   > By the way, even Newtonian mathematics is not entirely predictable -   
   > orbital mechanics are chaotic.   
   >   
   > I think that perhaps if you knew as much about physics as you purport to,   
   > you would have said "Einsteinian" rather than "Newtonian".   
   >   
   Run away little Otto   
   The water is too deep you.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)