Re: Date's First Great Blunder
From: Neo <neo55592_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 20 Apr 2004 21:42:25 -0700
Message-ID: <4b45d3ad.0404202042.49debf89_at_posting.google.com>
Date: 20 Apr 2004 21:42:25 -0700
Message-ID: <4b45d3ad.0404202042.49debf89_at_posting.google.com>
> > No one is arguing that Classical Mechanics isn't accurate enough for
> > the scope of a human's typical everday experience. You missed the
> > point.
>
> I don't think I did actually. Wol was arguing that Classical
> Mechanics "doesn't tally with reality" period.
Maybe it is better said, Classical Mechanics is x% accurate for a limited scope (planets and projectiles) and degrades considerable beyond it. Where as Quantum, is x% accurate for a broader scope which includes Classical Mechanics' scope. Received on Wed Apr 21 2004 - 06:42:25 CEST