4 ms·
I don’t think it’s a mistaken claim so much as a misused term-of-art by conflating it with its layman meaning. If you replace “interference” with “noise”, what’
by reikonomusha 7y ago
I don’t think it’s a mistaken claim so much as a misused term-of-art by conflating it with its layman meaning. If you replace “interference” with “noise”, what’s being said makes sense.
However, the second bit you said is true, even after correcting the term.
- jebej 7y agoThey seem to know about decoherence, and in a later post associate interference with probabilities, so I don't think that was the issue. Maybe a typo?