++> Inspired by exchange between Mark Bloss and Richard Meic
 ++> on "Uncertainty"
 
 MB> I disagree here, because...
 
 RM> Now, add this to the uncertainty that an :*EXACT*: copy of something
 RM> can be done.  Can one REALLY make an :*EXACT*: copy of anything?  No,
 RM> fore there _are_ differences, however subtle.
 
 MB> There is no difference between man "A" and man "B" at ALL, not even
 MB> subtle ones.  If any difference makes no difference, then there is
 MB> no difference at all.  ;)
 
   Richard! I also cannot imagine how to correlate a "knowledge of not
   same" with an *identical*" copy (assumed no subtle differences
   "other than" observer awareness of the happening).
 
   "....We are having a conversation. I am transported a foot to
        your left. You are aware that the result is a shifted copy
        as we continue with the conversation. The old me is gone
        and the new me is identical. I would tell you its the old
        me. Now you are transported a foot to my left while we are
        talking and the circumstance repeats and you are sure you are
        the old you. Now a third party enters the room and we all go
        to lunch as if nothing happened............................!
 
   Granting my sample was too long and less than stated perfect,
   it does to confuse me a bit more than might seem it will you!
   NOTE: I did not claim the copy to be the same, only identical.
   (different atoms ??? same structure ???. Other than just saying
   they are not the same, is there some more thaat can be said ?
   It would seem, without my knowing what, that there is more an
   issue here than not! no?
                        ??      ^_     ^_
                      /"cc\    /oo\   /oo\
               Dave... <<      _||_   _||_
 
--- Maximus/2 3.01
---------------