From: "@adelphia.com   
      
   remove wrote:   
   > David Mitchell wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >> So what, I've seen similar from other physicists.   
   >   
   >   
   > Really ...   
   > The problem they, and   
   >   
   >> apparently you, face is understanding the maths intuitively - if you just   
   >> work with the maths, everything comes out right - it's when you try to   
   >> apply ordinary intuition that things fall apart (the wave-particle   
   >> duality   
   >> is usually quoted as an example of this).   
   >>   
   >   
   > What is that sound?   
   > Oh I think you just shot yourself in the foot!   
   >   
   >  - if you just   
   >   
   >>> work with the maths, everything comes out right - it's when you try to   
   >>> apply ordinary intuition that things fall apart   
   >   
   >   
   > As you seem to be.   
   > Ouch that's gotta hurt.   
      
   You really are a piece of work David.   
      
   You have had this argument before  ... with "other Physicists" that use   
   the same example as I did.  Hummm. Imagine that!   
   And I had the gall to accuse you of not understanding that you don't   
   understand.  Wow!   
   If you just work with the Math ....   
      
      
      
   > That's one interpretation of it, yes.  Wheeler has another, as does John   
   > Cramer and as did David Bohm.   
   >   
   Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't.  The basic underlining principles   
   may be so implicit that it is not mentioned.  I doubt you can tell what   
   is really being proposed in either case.   
      
   Maybe you really do get it David.  ROFLMAO   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)