Briefly on Bohr and complementarity.

 

My understanding is that complementarity was proposed following the EPR publication, It can be stated as : that a single quantum can exhibit a particle-like \emph{or} a wave-like behavior, but never both at the same time.

That does seem like quite a " bold " assertion, but was widely, almost unanimously , agreed to by the scientific community of that time, and still widely supported today.

Whether a quantum is clearly defined or not, it's somewhat  safe to say that this represents a duality in thinking about the physical world, which I kind of believe was significantly addressed by David Bohm in the 1990's and his book : The Undivided Universe.

Nevertheless, we see this kind of assertion made about a variety of subjects in our social, economic, and political arenas, with bold assertions about something can be either - of one particular nature or the other.  

Of course, if one follows this stuff, it is difficult to avoid the issue of the " collapse " of the wave equation, as relates to distinctive change of state in a system.  

At any rate, I do suspect that these concepts apply in many other areas of scientific thought, and would also probably connect back even to phycology.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Puzzles

Belief, faith, and meaning

Okay, on space and time