Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> As I said, the probability of finding a particle in a particular place is 
>> based on multiplying complex numbers.
> 
>   Btw, I find it curious how you use the mathematical models as some kind
> of evidence that photons are not waves.

I believe you misunderstand me. I'm saying we never observe a wave. We just 
observe math that's the same math as a wave. That isn't what makes it "not a 
wave", that's what makes people used to think (and some people still think) 
it was a wave. :-)

I.e., just the opposite. The mathematical model is *not* evidence it's a 
wave, any more than the interference patterns are.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message