|> Perhaps this is why he says: "QM is simply a _Fuzzy_ logical `OR'
|> operation." (my emphasis)
and
|> ca314159 has also referred in the past to a paper, "Quantum Theory as
|> an Exotic Probability Theory". (I must say, he does come up with
|> interesting refs!) I haven't been able to download this in a
readable
|> form, but Jim Carr posted a few remarks. The idea of *formally*
|> extending (2) by allowing negative or even complex probabilities is
|> intriguing; I'm quite prepared to believe that QM could be recast in
|> these terms, and this might even prove enlightening. (Perhaps in the
|> same way that von Neumann's quantum logic provided new insights into
|> QM.)
> All this has (IMHO) nothing to do with ca314159's "ultra pure states".
I think that the absolute best statement regarding the "design" of the
logic in QM is provided in Rachel Garden's paper.
"Logic, States, and Quantum Probabilities" Int. J. of Theoretical
Physics
Vol. 35, No. 5, 1996.
>From the sounds of what you write you'd be very interested.
Regards
John
Is wave particle duality a red herring? There is an alternative...
Look at http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/7423/index.html