Temjin wrote:I have two Coke cans and two Pepsi cans on my desk right now. If I add those cans together (2+2), I come up with an answer of 4. Not 2, 3, 99, or 20,000, but four.
Now, someone please tell me why I don't really have four cans on my desk.
[Quandry]In fact, you have mu cans on your desk. Quantum theory can easily be used to show that there is a small but measurable probability that not all of your cans are real, but rather that at least a portion of them is an illusion caused by quantum fluctuations. Furthermore, the very CONCEPT of "can" is artificial, arbitrary, and anthropomorphic. So indeed, while you THINK that you have four cans, another observer not subject to the same circumstances would think that you have 2 cans, or 3 or 99 and his opinion would be just as valid.[/Quandry] How was that?
<CARDASSIAN>There are FOUR Cans!!!</CARDASSIAN>
Sorry, it had to be done!
This Quandary guy is totally fux0red in t3h h34d, ya know, ins4ne in t3h m3mb4n3? LOL
Well as far as I am concerned, quantum physics can go stuff things into its own suspicious crevices, as I live in the macroscopic world where averages matter and subatomic uncertainty, ultimately, doesn't make a difference.
As far as I'm concerned this is a chap who thinks pretention in sufficient quantities can make up for a lack of good backing for his argument, assuming an argument exists in there.... uncertainty all over again.
"Aw hell. We ran the Large-Eddy-Method-With-Allowances-For-Random-Divinity again and look; the flow separation regions have formed into a little cross shape. Look at this, Fred!"
"Blasted computer model, stigmatizing my aeroplane! Lower the Induced-Deity coefficient next time."
