Matti Pitkanen (matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi)
Mon, 16 Aug 1999 18:48:39 +0300 (EET DST)
On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> Dear Matti,
>
> > From matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi Mon Aug 16 19:35:28 1999
> > Return-Path: <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi>
> > Received: from rock.helsinki.fi (rock.helsinki.fi [128.214.3.50])
> > by kitada.com (8.9.3/3.7W) with ESMTP id TAA00922
> > for <hitoshi@kitada.com>; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 19:35:26 +0900
> > Received: from localhost (> > Received: from localhost (matpitka@localhost)
> > by rock.helsinki.fi (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA06472
> > for <hitoshi@kitada.com>; Mon, 16 Aug 1999 13:37:14 +0300 (EET DST)
> > Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 13:37:14 +0300 (EET DST)
> > From: Matti Pitkanen <matpitka@pcu.helsinki.fi>
> > X-Sender: matpitka@rock.helsinki.fi
> > To: Hitoshi Kitada <hitoshi@kitada.com>
> > Subject: Re: [time 537] Theory of cs should predict its own discovery
> > In-Reply-To: <000501bee5af$e64d0f80$0601a8c0@kitada.com>
> > Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.03.9908161336500.6430-100000@rock.helsinki.fi>
> > MIME-Version: 1.0
> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> > Status: R
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 14 Aug 1999, Hitoshi Kitada wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Matti,
> > >
> > > Matti, do you understand Japanese or/and Asian mind?
> >
> > Well, you could answer this question best!
>
> My question should not be treated lightly like this. It is related
> with the idea of my theory that you do not understand.
Sorry. My intention was not to abuse. It is quite possible that I do
not understand all ideas behind your theory. I however think I have
reasonable grasp about how you glue general relativity and
nonrelativistic QM. Also about the idea of LS. There are common elements
and also some crucial differences in the basic philosophy.
We simply have different belief systems! Having discussed in the net
for 4-5 years I have learned that every (am I exaggerating?) thinker, with
me included, is in the jail of his beliefs. The gist of the posting
which inspired your question was in fact a little self irony inspired by
this observation. The best we can do is to compare our thought constructs
as as art rather than claims for final truth. At least in my case,
the thought construct has changed so much during single year, that it
would be unrealistic to regard it as anything final.
With Best Regards,
Matti
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Oct 16 1999 - 00:36:29 JST