Wave particle duality s the concept in quantum mechanics that every particle or quantum entity may be partly described in terms not only of particles, but also of waves. It expresses the inability of the classical concepts "particle" or "wave" to fully describe the behavior of quantum-scale objects.

A stochastic process that generates the footprint of a point-like elementary particle as a hopping path, owns a characteristic function that is the Fourier transform of the location density distribution of the footprint. Thus the footprint simulates a wave package,

Wave-corpuscle duality is actually an historical concept. Already at the time of Newton were controversies on whether light is a wave or a particle. Now we have quantum mechanics but no historical continuity. It was falsely claimed for a long time that classical mechanics was a limiting case of quantum mechanics. It isn't, its limiting case is geometrical optics. A particle has wave and corpuscle aspects, but these aspects are quite partial. In fact we have a classical-quantal duality.

Dear Claude Pierre Massé,

Indeed, my conclusions do not decide between wave and particle. In fact, a major conclusion is that it is neither the one nor the other, since the radiation can not be exclusively a corpuscle or exclusively a wave, that it is not both at the same time. But the corpuscular and undulatory aspects of the radiation are due to what the observer decides to determine. Either he observes the quantum of energy corresponding to the potential distributed over the entire length of the propagation of the wave, contracted at one point because of Special Relativity, or he observes the effects of this potential carried by the wave while at the along its propagation and extract an undulatory behavior. And I arrive at this conclusion by a classical approach first, by physically interpreting the fine structure constant in passing, and by a relativistic approach afterwards. It is quite funny to come to a principle of uncertainty directly from relativistic developments. So neither a wave, nor a corpuscle, nor both. But I let you read the paper. Do not hesitate to contact me after that (given your name, we probably speak the same language).

Best regards,

Alexandre.

In optics the concept of the Optical Transfer Function applies the idea that the location density distribution of the image forming objects owns a Fourier transform, which is the OTF. The location density distribution is called point spread function (PSF).

In quantum physics the location density distribution of the footprint of elementary particles equals the squared modulus of the wave function of the particle. It has a Fourier transform that describes the momentum and the Hamiltonian of the particle.

These are quite similar concepts. Composite particles like atoms and molecules have a much more complicated interrelation between their footprint and the descriptors in Fourier space. The superpositions of the components are defined in Fourier space instead of in configuration space.

There is no duality, particles do not literally exist.

Hans is right:

Article Quantum Particle-Trajectories and Geometric Phase

Einstein's relativity has already been disproved (see peer-reviewed published papers: Article Challenge to the Special Theory of Relativity

Conference Paper Clock Time Is Absolute and Universal

Due to difficulties in the current format used by RG questions, well-known, my reply is at the new version in:

Preprint A Quantum Mechanical View of Reality or, can the Maxwell equ...

wave-particle duality is used to avoid discontinuity when necessary, but using distributions on set functions one can avoid such impediments as well

According to my previous relativistic demonstrations, the totally logical explanation to the wave-particle duality in the light is that the light travels like a wave through a 4th Zoom dimension (Demonstration obtaining the typical wave equation for that medium) and after from many demonstrations it is concluded that the Zoom can be considered a dimension, any impulse that travels like a wave by that medium will be seen in our 3 dimensions as a "ball" that becomes larger and in any axis of coordinates is will perceive as "particle"

And for the same price you have the explanation to the wave-particle duality and the medium of transmission of light in a vacuum

Now compare it with any quantum explanation and apply the logic and Ockham's razor

http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19015.96168

All There is no wave-particle duality but a new entity, the quantum-mechanical packet, called photon. See the experiment with a single photon, for example at:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzbKb59my3U

It is a tricky question. First, the language of universe is duality, and the reason all planets or sun, and moon are round, it is coming from this duality, and it must be a communication remark by wave duality. Second, the wave in space is always come with temperature, therefore we can call it wave-temperature, it duality. But when we talk about photon as particle and wave, the particle is stationary and wave photon might get these particle and transfer for while. https://www.academia.edu/37998115/The_Formation_of_a_Quantum_Mechanic_Sun and Article Dark­Matter in the Quantum Mechanic Universe

best wishes Javad Fardaei

Alexandre Georges

Thanks to Albert Einstein, wave-particle duality is what Newtonian physicists never dreamed of: Every kind of particle behaves sometimes like a probabilistic wave ,and every kind of wave behaves sometimes like a particle. Einstein's discovery of wave-particle duality of light led him to win the Nobel Prize in physics in 1921.

In less than 60 seconds , top expert in particle physics at University of Manchester Professor Brian Cox explains all quantum mechanics in this short and interesting BBC Youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcfQkxwz4Oo

Issam Mohanna

Sorry, but his explanation is but the usual "Feynman said." That's not an explanation indeed, and anyway that is wrong. He only describes the propagation of a classical linear wave.

For a full explanation read

https://www.researchgate.net/project/The-Hilbert-Book-Model-Project/update/5e81bdc1498d5000016e0c71

What do you think about wave-particle duality ?

There is no such wave-particle. When you say particle it means it has mass, and wave can not transfer particle through it wave. Wave-temperature exist, but not wave-particle. wave-particle has never been proved, but wave-temperature is. all the picture from billions of miles we receive it is coming from wave-temperature. .

Please read the referred document

If starting with a false axiom one has to insert at least 1 more error to conclude correct

Not "wave or particle" but wave AND particle. Photon causes and is directed by waves of aether (or spacetime, plenum, vacuum energy, etc.). Afshar experiment rejects wave or particle duality. Other experiments reject wave explanation of interference of light.

https://www.researchgate.net/project/STOE-photon-diffraction-and-interference?_sg=F5u-TbCHzR_2VVnuhcb6ukZ0cNv8RtoA77TyY-6bGCq7SQHe-wmcFLnV0K1vbLB_6K-qv4b0Dq44MWI-8YvTpS9N_y-hvv7hmtJw

or see video for shorter view

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMAjKk6k6-k

Planck's constant explains how electrons interact with each other by means of the ether. So, this interaction depends on quantized electron charge, and h is a constant in this interaction and not quanta of energy.

The distant mirror in MMX is not related to v -- only to c. So, no wave front tilting, and no effect of ether wind in the transverse arm. Therefore, Potier introduced a particle idea into the wave model, and started the wave-particle paradox.

Planck and Potier were the creator of the confusion long time ago.

Dear John-Erik Persson This is the fact, nothing in the universe is working mechanical, as Planck, Lorenz, Einstein, Newton are stating, this perception absolutely incorrect by describing that everything must work mechanically. The matter (mass) of the universe is divided into two categories. Chemical element ATOMS (all the element of periodic table). Atom is smallest complete unit of universe. Non-chemical element PARTICLES. Particles are mass, but smaller than atom, and they do not have any character, dust particle. What is wave? The duty of wave is transferring information period. i.e. we get picture from billions of miles through wave. If any place is talking about wave-particle. it is not true.

You or Planck>> Planck's constant explains how electrons interact with each other by means of the ether

Me: Electron, or neutron, proton, element of an atom can not stay free outside of an atom, and still call them name. Electron in an atom has a character, and duty to perform. Up to this date we do not know or see an electron, how Mr. Planck know over 100 yrs ago about electron that we do not know with todays technology?

What is the difference between You and Me?

John-Erik The Michelson question is nice paper. I got idea of your perception. thanks

Javad

Thanks for good words about my paper. It is good that you get ideas from my paper.

Javad

Wave-particle duality does not exist.

Wave-particle duality exists merely for those who cannot explain things in one way and then they try another

Paul

It does not exist. See below.

Dear John-Erik, that is my opinion too. They speculate and use it when they are not able to explain

Paul

Yes, a transverse ether wind can move a particle, but not tilt a wave front. So, the wave model was infected in 1882, by a particle idea. This created the illusion of particles in light, the wave-particle paradox.

Regards ______ John-Erik

Apropos, case photon has no mass, it can pass higgs fields without reactions

Paul

Without mass the bending near Sun is not due to gravity, but to the radial ether wind causing gravity. This bending is first away from the Sun and later back to the same direction, but not to the same position. This effect also gives about the same magnitude as observed from Earth. This means an s-shape bending.

Regards _____________ John-Erik