Wave or Particle?

How close do you personally feel you might identify with one or the other?



It seems we are born with a natural duality.

Either Male or female perspectives, left or right, Up or Down etc.

Do you feel you're governed by one with a little understanding of the other or can you reach beyond your initial life experience programing, and perceived reality and empathize by their other side?

Keep in mind, that there might be an "Observer" who may. or may not, have influenced governing our experience/Perception based on their parameters.

Thoughts?

a reply to: SLAYER69

Both. Like light.

Solidity and grounding in particulate form. Potentiality and possibilities in wave form.

a reply to: OneGoal

Nice

Many scientists no longer relate to matter as a particle and place preference into relating to matter as only a wave. Such a position is not really difficult to understand given the data.

Conservative scientist respond to such issues by complaining that they cannot confirm a physical relationship. Between what we understand with the commonly known physical sense and otherwise capacities, to sense and interact with reality beyond those commonly understood senses, or capacity to interact.

With all due respect to those who would disagree, there is a saying.

"Don't knock it till you try it."

a reply to: SLAYER69

Particle. I begin and end. I have a boundary. There are place where I am. There are places where I am not. We should learn how to be finite instead of pretending to be infinite.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Wave–particle duality is the fact that every elementary particle or quantic entity exhibits the properties of not only particles, but also waves. It addresses the inability of the classical concepts "particle" or "wave" to fully describe the behavior of quantum-scale objects.

en.wikipedia.org...

So an issue is whether or not someone can deductively identify an inherent difference between the capacity to process information differently in relation to a particle perspective, as apposed to an orientation inherent to a wave state?

To put it another way is the wave state of an electrical charge and its consequence with respect to the human brain. inherently any different respectively from interpretation, as to activity?

Any different than how it is represented in the particle perspective of what we commonly relate to as reality generally?

a reply to: Kashai

Any way you could put that in layman's terms for me?

Wave = Personality

Particle = Mood

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Our brains are made not only of particles but also of waves, inherently. The processes we refer to as brain activity in general and fundamentally could effectively be represented in a physical sense but in relation to a wave state.

In context, not only do our brains function from the general orientation of a particle state. In relation to this conclusion, we relate to reality as well from a wave state consciously.

All activity that results in Brain activity in effect is replicated from the point of view of the wave state inherent to matter.

We can think as a wave form because between wave and particle there is inherent to nature no real difference.

a reply to: SLAYER69
I am the ocean waving. Therefore, I am not a part (icle).

I thought some here would appreciate the thought experiment.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: SLAYER69

Particle. I begin and end. I have a boundary. There are place where I am. There are places where I am not. We should learn how to be finite instead of pretending to be infinite.

If you have identified yourself as something that appears then yes you will end and that is why humans are fearful and defensive. But if you have recognised that you are what is seeing (the observer) the appearance then that is another story!

a reply to: SLAYER69

Neither, but both at the same time? or at least it is how it feels like for me, hard to explain.

In the mirror many particles and movements (waves) are reflected yet the mirror is not that. By identifying even with the mirror one may fool oneself in to believing. a reply to: SLAYER69

a reply to: ancientthunder


In order to learn how to walk one must first learn how to crawl.


I feel we are addressing an issue that to some extent, even well beyond our current comprehension is Developmental.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: ancientthunder


In order to learn how to walk one must first learn how to crawl.


I feel we are addressing an issue that to some extent, even well beyond our current comprehension is Developmental.

Yes you are right we have much to address, but to do so we must undress matter also. As we take a bite in to an enormous subject in fact we are crawling. If we simply ignore it, we discard the work before. Science on the other hand seeks to explain and manipulate. We must fully remember that what ever has been going on, there is nothing new under the sun. All of our benefits lay on the idea on once we know something, what benefit can we make of it.

a reply to: Kashai

I don't believe we are brains whether wave or particle. We are certainly not brain activity. But whatever we want to represent the body as doesn't change what it represents. It begins and it ends. It is finite. It has a boundary between where it is and where it isn't. That's a particle. That's a body.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope


I see no reason to limit the body to conventional considerations.

I can see a Tree, smell it, hear the sound of wind against its leaves, as well as feel its structure. But that does not mean that having done so I understand everything about a Tree. I understand what I can perceive of it in relation to the common senses which does not mean that there is more to understand of a tree beyond those experiences.

Wave function in matter implicates no real separateness but perhaps in context to a vastly more complex issue than a Rainbow.

But in consideration kindred in every respect.

We are in action physiologically the result of our Brain Activity it seems a reasonably good place to start.

Our actions have an effect upon all things and while we can consider such an effect as weak, alternate to such a consideration is that our non-random activity is a reflection of something fundamental.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope



Present to me a particle and I will provide to you with physical evidence that it also behaves like a wave.

Bodies are structures that depend upon fundamentals and fundamentally particles also behave like waves.