>I'd love to see your opinion of it
> when you get a chance. It's called the transactional interpretation, and
> John Cramer's paper on this interpretation can be found at:
> http://www.npl.washington.edu/npl/int_rep/tiqm/TI_toc.html
Dan replied:
Its been kicking around since David Bohm in the '50s. It had some support before the work of Bell and Wagner.
The key sticking point with this interpretation is that it requires real hidden backwards in time signals. These signals violate causality...
[major snip]
Thanks for the explanation, I appreciate you taking the time to cover the pros and cons.
Reggie Bautista Second Line Maru
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
