It is City's fault.
They created too many jobs in Manchester that's why Arsenal is downsizing
Arsenal have told staff that redundancies at the club are being planned.
The club told staff the intention is to make 60 positions redundant in a bid to make significant savings, with cuts set to be across a number of departments.
The club’s coaching staff will be among the areas unaffected by the cuts, along with the performance backroom staff for the men’s and women’s team, the club’s community operation, the Arsenal Foundation, security staff and staff dedicated to the women’s team.
A consultation is under way and the decision could yet be subject to change.
More from @Dan_Sheldon_ & @gunnerblog
nyti.ms/4zAqix9
I hold that quantum mechanics is incomplete.
Well...... Einstein, Schrödinger and Dirac said the same.
The theory has two rules and they do not agree with each other.
The first rule is the Schrödinger equation:
iħ ∂ψ/∂t = Ĥψ
It takes the state now and gives the state at any later time. It has no randomness.
The second rule is measurement. A device acts on the system. The device returns one result. The Born rule gives the probability:
P(a) = |⟨a|ψ⟩|²
The state then jumps to |a⟩. The Schrödinger equation does not produce this jump.
The theory does not say what counts as a measurement. Schrödinger saw this problem. His cat in a box shows it. Einstein saw it too.
Wigner proposed that a conscious being makes the measurement. I should talk to him about this ....
I hold the opposite view.
An objective physical process, independent of any observer, departs from the Schrödinger equation.
Meaning that the process takes place whether or not anyone looks.
My own work sits inside the first rule. I studied the modified Berry-Keating Hamiltonian.
Lₙ^(α)(x) = Σₖ₌₀ⁿ (−1)ᵏ C(n+α, n−k) xᵏ/k!
Its eigenvalues relate to the zeros of the Riemann zeta function.
I used associated Laguerre polynomials to build the states.
ψₙ(x) = Nₙ x^(α/2) e^(−x/2) Lₙ^(α)(x)
I tested the spectrum with GUE statistics and the Montgomery-Odlyzko law, and all of this assumes unitary evolution.
I also applied the same Hamiltonian framework to simulation cost. A quantum computer approximates the evolution operator e^(-iĤt) with a circuit.
Well, my framework does not address collapse, neither supports nor contradicts my view on collapse.
We are all missing different parts.










