I have an Ibanez GSR 200 that I learned on . Few years back I bought an Ibanez BTB 675 M that has become my daily , for a while I had nylon flatwounds on it that sounded in my mind beautifully mellow . <| sep |> Like the Steelers over them too ? <| sep |> Team lacks vets who know how to deal with runs . That ' s my theory . <| sep |> Doesn ' t this mean that QM is fundamentally ambigious ? Not really . QM is exact if we treat the entire universe quantummechanically . The ambiguity you ' re seeing only occurs when we try to isolate and reason about a small part of the universe . It should be pretty obvious that if you try to look at a small part of the universe in isolation , then you have to somehow account for the fact that you ' re neglecting the rest of the universe , or you just ignore it and accept that your answer will not be 100 % correct . Option 2 is obviously simple , you just calculate the propperties of the system you ' re interested as if it were in an isolated vacuum . Option 2 can be done for quantum systems as well via the density matrix formalism .