If things in the past could have gone one way or could have gone another, with d
| Claret Talented Abode | 03/19/18 | | Claret Talented Abode | 03/19/18 | | Claret Talented Abode | 03/19/18 | | Anal 180 Macaca | 03/19/18 | | Motley sick gas station | 03/24/18 | | Claret Talented Abode | 03/20/18 | | Claret Talented Abode | 03/20/18 | | Claret Talented Abode | 03/24/18 | | Motley sick gas station | 03/24/18 | | tripping doobsian area | 03/23/19 | | Adventurous Multi-billionaire | 03/23/19 | | tripping doobsian area | 03/23/19 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: March 19th, 2018 5:18 PM Author: Claret Talented Abode
with different outcomes not visible to the naked eye but visible to hubble telescope, and then we look through hubble telescope, and see something that means that things went the latter of two ways way back in time, have we done something odd or funny with Quantum Mechanics?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3923067&forum_id=2#35639764)
|
|
Date: March 23rd, 2019 8:07 AM Author: tripping doobsian area
Agree with the article.
A trap people get into is taking the term "particle-wave duality" literally.
Light or other fundamental phenomena are neither "particles" nor "waves". Light is light.
It's like comparing an elephant to a tree trunk/water hose duality because the legs are like a tree trunk and the nose is like a garden hose. An elephant is neither, it's just an elephant.
Similarly, light is light. It's not a particle and not a wave.
I also have no issues accepting that the wave function is reality.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3923067&forum_id=2#37976147) |
|
|