"A entity consists of multiple standing waves which have slightly different frequencies.
At a point in time the waves combine to form a composite larger wavelength.
We perceive the entity at this point in time as a “wave” entity."

maybe, i think it would depend upon how you look at it, it shall always be percievable as either a wave or a particle.


"The multiple waves now achieve exact alignment which causes an extremely short wavelength and a much higher energy density.
We know perceive the entity as a particle."

again the entity shall always be percievable as either a wave or a particle.

"If you interact with the entity while it is in a wave form it will respond with wave properties.
If you interact with the entity while it is in a particle form it will respond with particle properties."

the entity shall always have both properties and be able to interact either way and is never either or until it is percieved.

regards, tim

• My opinion is that only waves are entities - yanniru - November 15, 2004 - 03:21 UTC
  • excepting for the classical sense - sagefr0g - November 15, 2004 - 03:39 UTC
    • Classical theory of particles - yanniru - November 15, 2004 - 13:06 UTC
      • Another coincidence - yanniru - November 15, 2004 - 13:31 UTC
        • ...or i-i-is it? - carefuluniverse - November 17, 2004 - 04:20 UTC
          • Ruquist is right - wandaqueen - January 22, 2005 - 03:33 UTC
            • Ruquist very well might BE anonymous Wandaqueen - kantolfir2 - January 22, 2005 - 20:31 UTC
              • Mike is just illiterate about science - wandaqueen - January 23, 2005 - 04:04 UTC
                • Devise a proof which will satisfy an unfair, anonymous person - kantolfir2 - January 23, 2005 - 04:28 UTC
                  • That's no proof - wandaqueen - January 23, 2005 - 14:08 UTC
                    • The alleged question was not asked coherently - carefuluniverse - January 23, 2005 - 23:06 UTC
                      • What is the matter? - wandaqueen - January 24, 2005 - 02:51 UTC
                        • Anonymous Wandaqueen requested proof then dropped the ball - kantolfir2 - January 27, 2005 - 18:51 UTC
                          • My preference - wandaqueen - January 27, 2005 - 19:27 UTC
        • Why not find out for sure? - duordi - November 24, 2004 - 03:18 UTC
          • Sure it has.... - bruce - November 24, 2004 - 20:50 UTC
            • Bruce is right. - duordi - November 25, 2004 - 15:13 UTC
      • There is no evidence in the double... - bruce - November 15, 2004 - 20:11 UTC
  • QED - bruce - November 15, 2004 - 04:18 UTC