I have a theory with very weak support. I think that Niven changed "Jerome Branch Corbett" to "Jerome Branch Corbell" to make the name closer to
"James Branch Cabell". I don't actually remember how I came up with this theory; a cosmic ray might very well have flipped a bit in one of my
neurons.

In article <ujdbcf$3s45f$1...@dont-email.me>,
Michael F. Stemper <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:

On 18/11/2023 14.24, James Nicoll wrote:

In article <c20be383-2112-4497...@googlegroups.com>,
Ahasuerus <ahas...@email.com> wrote:

On Saturday, November 18, 2023 at 1:30:17 PM UTC-5, James Nicoll wrote:

In article <frthli1iq0iksluea...@jwbrown.co.uk>,
Jerry Brown <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

I believe the protagonist of "Rammer" is "Corbell" not "Corbett". >>>>>

I checked my 1st Ed MMPB of A Hole in Space and it was Corbett there. >>>

It's "Corbell" in later editions of _A Hole in Space_ and in the novel _A
World Out of Time _ (1976), which incorporates an updated version
of "Rammer" (1971).

I don't know why the name changed but it did.

I have a theory with very weak support. I think that Niven changed "Jerome >Branch Corbett" to "Jerome Branch Corbell" to make the name closer to >"James Branch Cabell". I don't actually remember how I came up with this >theory; a cosmic ray might very well have flipped a bit in one of my >neurons.

Maybe someone pointed out "Tom Corbett" to him and he decided he didn't
want that association?

Quantum Theory, 1918-1927: Adaptation by Physicists and Mathematicians
to a Hostile Intellectual Environment_ (Forman) and _The speed of
gravity - What the experiments say_ (Van Flandern) on my To Be Read
(or rather "Listened To" list). My literal list lends a hand to discern
how much of the Copenhagen Interpretative dogma built on top of the two
slit experiment is magical thinking - a house of cards.

The simple admonishment to "shut up and calculate" doesn't cut it for
me. YMMV.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flywheel,_Shyster,_and_Flywheel> -
1930s radio comedy with some Marx Brothers, remade
in the 1990s by the BBC - "was originally titled Beagle,
Shyster, and Beagle, with Groucho Marx's bad lawyer
character named Waldorf T. Beagle, until a real lawyer
from New York named Beagle contacted NBC and
threatened to file a lawsuit unless the name was
dropped." Thus, _Flywheel, Shyster and Flywheel_.

Don wrote:

Thank you. _Einstein Plus Two_ will join _Weimar Culture, Causality, and >>Quantum Theory, 1918-1927: Adaptation by Physicists and Mathematicians
to a Hostile Intellectual Environment_ (Forman) and _The speed of
gravity - What the experiments say_ (Van Flandern) on my To Be Read
(or rather "Listened To" list). My literal list lends a hand to discern
how much of the Copenhagen Interpretative dogma built on top of the two >>slit experiment is magical thinking - a house of cards.

The simple admonishment to "shut up and calculate" doesn't cut it for
me. YMMV.

That's all anyone can do, because it's not like anything that you have physically experienced. It's a thing that doesn't exist in the kitchen
table scale world that we are familiar with. You can't think of it as
a wave, you can't think of it as a particle. You can only rely on the
math that describes it.

I wish there was a nice analogy to something in the kitchen table scale world, but there's not.

In article <2023...@crcomp.net>, Don <g...@crcomp.net> wrote:

Quantum Theory, 1918-1927: Adaptation by Physicists and Mathematicians
to a Hostile Intellectual Environment_ (Forman) and _The speed of
gravity - What the experiments say_ (Van Flandern) on my To Be Read
(or rather "Listened To" list). My literal list lends a hand to discern >how much of the Copenhagen Interpretative dogma built on top of the two >slit experiment is magical thinking - a house of cards.

The simple admonishment to "shut up and calculate" doesn't cut it for
me. YMMV.

That's all anyone can do, because it's not like anything that you have physically experienced. It's a thing that doesn't exist in the kitchen
table scale world that we are familiar with. You can't think of it as
a wave, you can't think of it as a particle. You can only rely on the
math that describes it.

I wish there was a nice analogy to something in the kitchen table scale world, but there's not.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."