Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a26ed67fcbfcfda9

Jump to content

Talk:Peter J. Lewis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 19 years ago by Atfyfe in topic Conspiracy interpretation

Defense

[edit]

A google search for: "Peter Lewis", quantum , returns 776 hits. While a few are unrelated to Peter Lewis most refer to him. The number of hits for his name only increase if other combinations were searched for, e.g. "Lewis, Peter" quantum, or "Peter J. Lewis" quantum, etc. Not that I put a lot of stock into google searches when it comes to rating academics studying the intricacies of an incredibly complex and mathematical discipline.

Peter Lewis is an active player in group of living philosophers attempting to achieve some understanding in regards to quantum mechanics. He is well published in highly respected philosophic journals. And while you might not find him notable enough for the Wikipedia encyclopedia, he does appear in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on "The Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics". I submit to Wikipedia that any philosopher who is notable enough to have their arguments/philosophy appear in such a prominent encyclopedia as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, is notable enough to have an entry on Wikipedia. Preceding unsigned comment added by Atfyfe (talkcontribs) 06:19, 1 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Conspiracy interpretation

[edit]

What's that? 1Z 15:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/archive/00002651/ -Atfyfe 21:27, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply