<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><div>On Jul 5, 2010, at 1:11 PM, <a href="mailto:x@extropica.org">x@extropica.org</a> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div>As for "true" quantum randomness, it's not clear that this distinction<br>makes a difference. </div></blockquote><div><br></div>It depends on what quantum interpretation is correct. If Copenhagen is true then probability really can be part of the thing itself. If Everett and his Many Worlds is true then probability is always just a measure of out ignorance and quantum probability is no different from classical probability.</div><div><br></div><div> John K Clark<br><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br></body></html>