Originally Posted By: finiter

What my theory says is 'duality does not exist'. We have only particles that shows some wavelike character because of its wavy motion.


And as I said provide me some observation that only has particle behaviour that could not be done by waves. Would you like a list of observations which show off wave like behaviour that can not be explained by particles.


Originally Posted By: finiter

Electrons and neutrons have mass, which can be measured accurately. Their masses are are not probabilistic, but deterministic. I have explained how the the mass of neutron can be predicted, and this becomes possible because the mass is deterministic.


That is a ridiculous statement so you know it's mass exactly except if you weigh it well it will vary around a range????? And that makes sense to you.

I can give you hundreds of observations about a nuetron that will defy it being a particle lets be sensible here. Do you really want to go into this or you happy to go read up nuetron observations.

Quote:

Electrons and neutrons have finite masses. If you take QM to be correct, then the masses are probabilistic.


You have no understanding of QM if you think that .. Quantum mechanics is built on Quanta it's in the name even.


Quote:

If you take that they are solid particles, then the masses are deterministic. The observations can be explained in both ways, and hence these observations cannot be regarded as a proof of QM.


Right so it solid and real and ohhhh we just ignore those dinosaur bones again.

Quote:

I don't like QM because of the 'instant-duality'. Duality (not instant-duality) is something that can exist(IMO). The particle should take some time to change into a wave and there should be a mechanism for that. I argue QM is wrong on the basis of logic, and not because I dislike it.


I don't particually like duality either set lets look carefully at observation evidence ... oh wait you can't provide any ... and actually noone has been able to when challenged.

Last edited by Orac; 11/02/11 10:06 AM.
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.