On Tuesday, April 13, 2021 at 9:30:09 AM UTC-6 medinuclear wrote:
> *[Philip Benjamin] * > > Particles of matter with mass also BHAVE as waves [AS IF mass-less] with a > wavelength, p=h/λ, first proposed by de Broglie, where p is momentum. > Matter PARTICLE is found to have interference PROPERTIES AS IF any other > wave. * AS IF Logic **≠* *BOTH & Fallacy Behaving ≠ Being. *Behaving is > a PROPERTY which can be epistemically understood. Being is ontology which > is beyond the scope of finite sciences and finite brains, howsoever > brilliant the brains be. One need not confound *being *with *behaving*. > Stop wasting bandwidth here! If something produces a measurable effect, such as de Broglie waves in an electron microscope, that something has existence; that is, it has ontological status. Doesn't mean we know exactly what it is. AG > The relationship between momentum and wavelength is fundamental for all > PARTICLES (with MASS). That does not TRANSMUTE massive particles into > massless waves, even in any microscope!! Electrons were the first particles > with mass to be directly established to have the de Broglie wavelength. > Protons, helium nuclei, neutrons, and many others have been observed later > to display interference patterns when they interact with objects having > masses but sizes similar to their de Broglie wavelengths. > > Wolfgang Pauli (brilliant occultist-physicist) truly believed some of the > views that Einstein accused Bohr with. He hypothesized a “lucid mysticism,” > a synthesis between rationality and religion, and speculated that quantum > theory could unify the psychological/scientific and philosophical/mystical > approaches to consciousness. Philosopher and addict of Eastern mysticisms > Arthur Schopenhauer, whose views on reality were in turn influenced by > Eastern religions convinced Pauli of quantum mysticism. Planck considered > religion (Christianity) and science compatible based on his opinion that > they are both based on objectivity but refer to distinct facets of reality. > Meanwhile, Paul Dirac rejected any kind of religious vocabulary, arguing > that “religion is a jumble of false assertions with no basis in reality.” > > *Philip Benjamin* > > *References*. > > Juan Miguel Marin > https://phys.org/news/2009-06-quantum-mysticism-forgotten.html. > . “’Mysticism’ in quantum mechanics: the forgotten controversy.” European > Journal of Physics. 30 (2009) 807-822. > > > > Morton Tolball. > https://mortentolboll.weebly.com/quantum-mechanics-and-the-philosophy-of-niels-bohr.html > > Bohr shows, that light in some experiments behaves, as if it is particles, > and in others as if it is waves. And here we have the foundation for the > next misinterpretation, that goes on, that it is the consciousness of the > physicist, which affects the light. This has led to the misunderstanding in > the public, that quantum mechanics should imply, that there isn´t given any > objective or true description of the physical reality, consequently that it > is the human consciousness, which produces the phenomena: subjectivism. The > same misunderstanding characterizes by the way also Einstein´s theory of > relativity, that this should support relativism. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/317061eb-ca42-49ce-a520-821619f34cd7n%40googlegroups.com.
