Timeline for What are the strongest objections to be made against decoherence as an explanation of "collapse?"
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 16, 2018 at 19:46 | history | edited | A_P | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 253 characters in body
|
| Feb 14, 2018 at 21:24 | comment | added | A_P | (It has also been recommended that I link to the meta commentary here WRT deletion: physics.meta.stackexchange.com/q/10461) | |
| Feb 14, 2018 at 21:20 | history | edited | A_P | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 7 characters in body
|
| Feb 14, 2018 at 17:44 | history | edited | A_P | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Adding context so it doesn't get deleted again
|
| Feb 14, 2018 at 17:39 | comment | added | A_P | @JMac I've added more context and restored the answer. I hope this is okay. Can you please help me understand why you think it is not a good answer? | |
| Feb 14, 2018 at 17:39 | comment | added | A_P | @EmilioPisanty I don't have a new question. Did my answer make it seem like I did? | |
| Feb 14, 2018 at 17:38 | history | edited | A_P | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Adding context so it doesn't get deleted again
|
| Feb 14, 2018 at 17:35 | history | undeleted | user118804 | ||
| S Feb 14, 2018 at 10:21 | history | post deleted from review |
Emilio Pisanty Ignacio Vergara Kausel DK2AX Chris♦ JMac Wrichik Basu |
||
| Feb 13, 2018 at 19:30 | comment | added | JMac | This does not provide an answer to the question. Once you have sufficient reputation you will be able to comment on any post; instead, provide answers that don't require clarification from the asker. - From Review | |
| Feb 13, 2018 at 17:31 | review | Low quality answers | |||
| S Feb 14, 2018 at 10:21 | |||||
| Feb 13, 2018 at 17:21 | review | Late answers | |||
| Feb 13, 2018 at 17:26 | |||||
| Feb 13, 2018 at 17:05 | history | answered | A_P | CC BY-SA 3.0 |