According to Bohr's complementarity principle it is possible to choose between measurements in which either the particle aspect or the wave aspect is observed. This principle is built into the standard formalism of quantum mechanics you find in most quantum mechanics textbooks. Nowadays it is known that non-standard (generalized) measurements are possible in which both the particle and the wave aspect can be observed to a certain extent. Mathematically such generalized measurements correspond to so-called positive operator-valued measures (which generalize the projection-valued measures of standard quantum mechanics).
Willem de Muynck
I am going to take the opposite position in this discussion and claim that it is possible to explain the particle-like properties of a quantum object such as an electron or photon using only a wave explanation. The essence of a particle is a discrete object that is confined to a specific location. The essence of a wave is an energetic oscillating disturbance that is distributed over a volume of at least one wavelength in circumference. These are simplified definitions which could be expanded, but the point is that the concept of a particle is fundamentally different from the concept of a wave. Wave-particle duality is often described as a "paradox" because the two properties are contradictory. Some physicists visualize a photon in flight as a particle that is surrounded by a "field" of waves. However, this dual model does not properly address the fact that a photon can appear to be 100% wave or 100% particle.
The proposed solution is that waves that possess quantized angular momentum appear to be particles. We have macroscopic examples of quantized waves. A Bose-Einstein condensate is a superfluid. If angular momentum is introduced into this superfluid, it does not produce bulk rotation. Instead, the angular momentum is broken into isolated rotating vortices, each possessing h bar of angular momentum. Each vortex is a quantized unit of angular momentum which exhibits particle-like properties and exists in the surrounding superfluid which does not possess angular momentum. This example is the first step in visualizing fundamental particles as waves in spacetime possessing quantized angular momentum which gives particle-like properties. This model has been analyzed in the paper attached to the link below. It is possible to quantify the wave amplitude, frequency, size, energy, impedance etc. This particle model generates both gravitational and electromagnetic forces. A previously unknown connection between these forces is also calculated. The conclusion is that waves in spacetime can possess quantized angular momentum which gives them particle-like properties.
http://onlyspacetime.com/QM-Foundation.pdf
John, actually the connection between gravitational and electromagnetic forces has long been discussed - it's one of the linchpins of Burkhard Heim's work, for instance. I believe that Tesla also investigated this in his lesser known work. NASA examined in-depth Burkhard Heim's theories (not sure what their conclusion was.) Interestingly, his theories lead to a total of 12 ST dimensions, rather than the 4 that you reckon.
As very often, things quickly become a matter of semantics - there is a 'naive' definition of what a particle is, and a non-naive one. If you adopt the latter, then your description seems to work.
Chris: Even though the subject of a possible connection between gravitational and electromagnetic forces has been previously discussed, I am claiming to have found a previously unknown connection between these forces. A wave-based particle model has led to new insights into the electromagnetic force and the gravitational force. For example, the gravitational force between two fundamental particles can be expressed as a simple square of the electrostatic force (equation 19 in the previously referenced paper). The proposed wave-based particle model quantifies wave properties such as amplitude, frequency and impedance. This permits a quantitative analysis of particle energy, angular momentum, spacetime curvature, forces, etc.
Dear All,
Complete suppression of one complementary aspect is only possible as an extreme limiting case of an experiment designed to test that aspect. However, the notion of particle itself is ambiguous. What is meant by a point particle? An object occupying a geometrical point, But any real point particle will have some dimensions however small.
Secondly, the wave aspects occur or are verifiable only for quanta in motion. For quanta at rest the de Broglie wavelength is infinite and no wave characteristic can be tested. See my article on my RG page: On the reality of tachyonic deBroglie waves for an interesting discussion.
Regards,
Rajat
The answer is no. If you suppress one, the other will be automatically suppressed. You cannot have a coin with only one face. You must have head and tail both, or nothing.
All I can say is that QM is becoming increasingly harder to accept; nowadays, it is a matter of belief---just like religión---.
To those who have witnessed (experimental or experiential) a truth (of any kind), the existence of a phenomenon becomes a reality. To those who have only heard or read a second hand account of the existence of a phenomenon, it becomes a matter of belief. This is equally applicable to both the QM and the religion.
To suppress completely one of the features is not practically possible, however, you can manipulate a quantum system to have a more wave-like behavior, or a more particle-like one. If you produce the wave-packet as tightly localized in space and the linear momentum is high, the wave-length is small. The better is localized the wave-packet and the lower is its dispersion during the time (this property is more difficult to realize with very light particles, e.g. electron, but easier to realize with massive atoms), it's more possible to treat the wave-packet as a particle, i.e. some trajectory.
To the contrary, slowing down a particle increases the wavelength and therefore the wave-like behavior. One can perform interference experiments, which for very small wavelengths are difficult.
Duality wave-particle arises from a classical point of view where particles in micro-world are identified with point-like objects that cannot justify observed phenomena, where it appears that the wave interpretation is more correct. However, this conflicts with the quantum constituents of fields that instead are considered just point-like particles. ( ... photons in quantum e.m. field....) In the classical formulation of quantum mechanics (QM) this duality is interpreted as a probabilistic effect, namely the wave aspect is a probabilistic wave. Unfortunately in this way it is impossible to reconcile Einstein's general relativity (GR) with QM. Really to quantize Einstein's equation, (or any other non-linear classical field equation), produces linear equations that interpret quantum fluctuations around classical solutions. But in this way one cannot encode non-linear non-commutative phenomena. Quantum Gravity is not a quantum fluctuation around a classical solution of the Einstein equation !
The reciprocal incompleteness of QM with GR can be solved by means of non-linear quantum propagators as formulated in my algebraic topologic theory of quantum PDEs, and applied to quantum super Yang-Mills PDEs. There wave-particle duality disappears, since particles are encoded by means of non-commutative geometric objects. (For more details please look to the following Wikipedia link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Quantum_gravity.)
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Particle Physics