Re: A quote concerning randomness
From: Bill Unruh (unruh_at_string.physics.ubc.ca)
Date: 10/11/04
- Next message: Bill Unruh: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Previous message: Ian Clowes: "Detecting changed portions of large data set"
- In reply to: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Next in thread: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Reply: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: 11 Oct 2004 16:42:42 GMT
Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen@t-online.de> writes:
]Bill Unruh wrote:
][snip]
]> That would be the sixth unpublished letter in as many months. New Scientist
]> is getting to be highly unreliable on quantum matters.
]It seems indeed to be a common opinion that such popular-scientific
]periodicals often have features to share with newspapers and other
]common media and have usualls lots of letters to editors because
]of that. On the other hand, if you could spend enough effort to
]write a clear and strong refutation, you could write to the editor
]of the journal that published Tim Palmer's original paper (I
]suppose (conjecture) you also object to that and not only to
]Stewart's interpretation of it).
Journals publish articles, not letters. One could write an article on his
article. I would have to dive in much deeper than I have to do that.
- Next message: Bill Unruh: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Previous message: Ian Clowes: "Detecting changed portions of large data set"
- In reply to: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Next in thread: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Reply: Mok-Kong Shen: "Re: A quote concerning randomness"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
|