Hi Ron, Marsha, I like that "Objectivly speaking, reality is a dream within a dream within a dream...et infinum"
I have used "The dreams that stuff are made from" to bastardize the bard - though I didn't coin that version. Just for the record the limitations are not within the "measuring devices" - but with the very concept of measurement, given current received wisdom of fundamental physics. FYI - my current view is one level lower than either particles or waves - quantum information - where wave-particle complemenarity are just two views of the same information. We'll have to wait for that expensive piece of kit in Switzerland to be a complete failure (or disaster) before much of the world notices though. The guys with the funding have the wrong maths - Einstein corrected his error, but still very few have noticed post-Copenhagen. Ian. On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:09 PM, X Acto<[email protected]> wrote: > Marsha, > > I believe it seems to exclude a particles momentum or trajectory simply > because > of the limits of the measuring devices and the gravitational effects it has > on them. > > For starters, mainly because particles are not really entities or substances > but an intersection > of fields of force. > As I understand it, particles are layers apon layers of said intersections > built up from a backround > of these fields of "force" for lack of a better word, manifesting in strong > and weak atomic forces. > > The popular theory at the moment, which the super collider hoped to verify, > was that all of this > is a manifestation of the field of space, or string theory, that space is > composed of fluctuating > quantum rings. > Objectivly speaking, reality is a dream within a dream within a dream...et > infinum > > so measuring is a bit of a problem, objectivly. Complimentrarity, says that > these particles > and forces only exist in relation to eachother. to isolate them and calculte > their trajectory > is misunderstanding them, it creates paradox. like the particle/wave duality, > the duality > lies in how the phenomena is measured not in the phenomena itself. > > So to conclude, the problem is in how physicists understand particles and the > limits of the > methods of measurement. > > -Ron > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: MarshaV <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 6:27:27 AM > Subject: [MD] principle of complimentarity > > Greetings, > > > > Why is it that if we perform an experiment to determine a quantum particle's > position, it excludes knowing only the particle's momentum and not > everything else? > > > > > > Marsha > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____________ > > > > "He who neglects the present moment throws away all he has." > (Friedrich von Schiller) > > > > > > > > > > > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > > > > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
