No, I would adopt him out to a hard working, loving, Jewish family without any hatred of other peoples  

And what if that was not an option? What if the options were only, kill baby Hitler or not kill baby Hitler?

I think I would kill baby Hitler. One of my core thought processes is that you make the best decision based on the information you have and don't regret decisions made in that way if you find out later given more information that it was actually the suboptimal choice. Therefore, given what I know now about the past, it would save millions of lives to snuff out Hitler from history. If that happened to have unforeseen consequences I think I could live with the idea that I made the best decision I could given the information I had at the time.

Linear algebra has tons of applications especially for 3D graphics. The Jacobian is very useful when you want to do arbitrary coordinate system transformations which comes in very handy if you're dealing with those pesky curved spaces in general relativity ...

Anyways, the guy I was responding to probably won't comeback to answer these questions in quite a while if he ever ...

If no other option then I would NOT kill him, at least we know from that time-line what he does and that in the end he is defeated, if we remove him, it will change the time-line unpredictably, another more capable Nazi may take his place, one that might not lose this time 

It's really a choice between a known time-line VS one that we can't predict  

Edit:Rab has a valid point that the current history is one we survived and overwon the Nazis and when baby hitler is killed,a stronger nazilike regime could exist that even causes more suffering and the allies to lose.

1. Failure to cite a single physicist supporting your delusion. WRONG

2. Zero support for your initial claim (again). WRONG

3. QM does apply to macro scale. Start reading...you're in dire need of it. WRONG

https://www.livescience.com/27137-uncertainty-principle-measured-macro-scale.html

http://www.yalescientific.org/2010/09/quantum-mechanics-on-the-macroscale/

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/208754/do-quantum-mechanics-at-the-macro-scale-disprove-general-relativity-or-prove-som

4. Dodging (Again) WRONG

5. I don't see a resume. WRONG

It's quite clear by your bizarre response that you have no interest in the actual claims you made, were called out on your bullshit and are now running as fast as you can to the nearest red herring you can find.

Debate concluded-

Victor: Me

Loser: You

You might want to reconsider what you wrote here.

Quantum mechanics is the best theory we have to explain how nature works. Until someday, someone will come up with a better theory. Of course QM applies to "any" scale. For the same reasons General relativity applies to Gravitation on "any" scale. Now we can get away with Newton's Gravity theory for most of the daily business, although it is only an approximation of the "real thing". Same goes for any other laws for which we can get away in daily business by being approximations to the "real thing", quantum mechanics.

It also helps that all those "approximative theories" are (mostly) understandable, while qm really is a bitch. I don't think there is a single physicist that fully understands qm (I certainly don't, and I have a PhD in quantum optics...)

And lastly, as for killing Hitler baby, what would be the point? He was a product of his time. Gettimg him off the map would have resulted in just another figure taking his place. And Hitler was a lousy military commander, so things might have turned out even worse without him.

LOL, shallow response as always coming from you. Can't even care to explain any of the things you post ... 

Quantum mechanics is great at describing condensed matter physics, particle physics, and other small scale physical interaction theories. It neatly accounts for fundamental forces such as strong nuclear, electromagnetic, and the weak nuclear forces but hardly any of it can be used to study astronomy or interactions between celestial objects where gravitational forces dominate at those scales. Quantum mechanics as it currently stands has no business in dealing with gravity so that is where general relativity must come in ... 

Newton's laws of motion is good enough for many daily observations but as you realize it has some profound flaws which is why modern physics such as general relativity or quantum mechanics are built on top of the theory of special relativity which is one of the greatest discoveries of all time. Despite both encompassing special relativity which is arguably the only piece of truth in this universe, they have taken divergent paths that are now irreconcilable with each other ... 

Regardless, my point to him was that quantum mechanics does not take absolute precedence over every physical laws known to us because we still have two viable sets of physical laws that have differing description of our reality ... 

No, absolutely not. I would never kill baby Hitler. I think people who would say yes are more likely to advocate for authoritarianism because they believe they can control the world. For those of us who actually understand history would know that following the collapse of the German Empire at the end of the First World War, it created a political vacuum that caused every radical from both the left and right to come out of the woodwork to try and gain a position of political power. You didn't have a simple situation where you had the Social Democrats and Conservatives in power while the Nazis and Communists were duking it out on the streets. There were probably hundreds of fringe political groups out there. The Nazis just happened to be the ones who came out on top and Hitler just happened to be the head of the Nazi Party, a party that while he helped define and even used his artistic skills to create the Swastika logo for, he did not even create the party. The sad truth is if it wasn't Hitler who came to power, there's a good chance that some other dictator would have, possibly someone even worse than Hitler. Hitler did not create or even popularize the ideas he proposed. They were already there. The Second World War was probably going to happen anyway (it was predicted back in 1919) because of how badly the Allies screwed up the conclusion of the First World War.

In the end, we still most likely would have had similar terrible events occur and you would be in prison for murdering a baby. So there you go.