🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <766@klipper.cs.vu.nl> biep@cs.vu.nl (J. A. "Biep" Durieux) writes:
>... So the information that you observed your particle must have travelled
>in zero time to the other half-wit. FTL information transfer. <Applause>

In article <650@pbhyc.UUCP> djo@pbhyc.UUCP (Dan'l Oakes) writes:
>... Physicists become so used to manipulating equations that they
>confuse them with the particles they describe.
>...  The particle has been spinning very happily left all along. 

In article <19028@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>,
kube@cogsci.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Paul Kube) writes:
>OK, it's time somebody brought up Bell.
>So, everybody, what do you want to give up: the impossibility of FTL
>information transfer, that the particle was spinning happily left all
>along, or the relevance of mathematics for physics?
>--Paul kube@berkeley.edu, ...!ucbvax!kube

Too bad Einstein already has thrown away the ether. Isn't there some other
concept we might want to get rid of (other than observer-independent
behaviour)?

-- 
						Biep.  (biep@cs.vu.nl via mcvax)
When a doctor doctors a doctor, does the doctoring doctor doctor the doc-
tored doctor with the doctoring doctor's doctrine,  or does the doctoring
doctor doctor  the doctored doctor  with the doctored doctor's  doctrine?