cotton said:
And see, I always thought that the whole "wave-particle" issue was brought about less by some magical property of light than with our definitions of "wave" and "particle" and trying to fit little twinkles into our overly restrictive constructs when in fact, although sharing characteristics of both the conceptions of waves and particles, light does not wholly and exclusively belong in either category, but rather in one of their own which we are not yet able to adequately define.
I now realize that such thoughts are the fault of meme.
I think that the best way I've heard the duality in photons and other quanta is that depending on the scale of examination, they reflect (no pun intended) an appropriately-scaled result. In other words, if you examine them (conduct experiments) at a large scale, they're particles, on fine scales, they're waves. Hence the ability to detect individual photons as quanta but when put into a condition where they interact with other photons, they're a wave.
At least that's how it was once explained to me.
Mad Mantis said:
Wouldn't that mean that we are restricted to certain trains of thought depending on the linear combinations of the waveform probabilities formed in our minds?
Only as far as the probability waveform our minds would generate. Ever think of something normally quite outside of your normal behaviour? The key word is
normally. If it's within probability, then it is possible that somewhere, somehow, you just may do it. I can't say for certain (like anybody reputable couldn't), but somewhere, somewhen, there just *may* be an alternate universe 'you' that is doing that very same described abnormal action/thought.
Fun, isn't it?
-Patsy
"I'm my own alternate-universe/history grandpa!"
