[MD] principle of complimentarity

[Ian Glendinning]

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<xacto at rocketmail.com> 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 <valkyr at att.net>
> To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
> 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/
>