home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky talk.abortion:49326 talk.religion.misc:21950 alt.atheism:21961 sci.skeptic:20138
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion,talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,sci.skeptic
- Path: sparky!uunet!uchinews!ellis!hau4
- From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven hauptfeld)
- Subject: Re: Reconciling OT with NT
- Message-ID: <1992Nov23.224554.16761@midway.uchicago.edu>
- Sender: news@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
- Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
- Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
- References: <1992Nov16.032613.11967@netcom.com> <1ead9cINN8a5@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de> <1992Nov17.173850.14175@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>
- Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 22:45:54 GMT
- Lines: 17
-
- In article <1992Nov17.173850.14175@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
- >In article <1ead9cINN8a5@horus.ap.mchp.sni.de> frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer) writes:
- >>Did you all have the same problem with wave-particle duality?
- >>Lemme see. Light is particle and light is wave. I cannot reconcile these
- >>ideas without throwing out all preconceived notions. You say wave and
- >>I say particle, let's call the whole thing off.
- >
- >Sigh. More quantum pseudoscience.
- >
- >Light acts like a particle sometimes and like a wave sometimes.
-
- Wrong. Light acts like light. Always. "Particle" and "wave" are just our
- idealized notions, and in different situations they describe light (or
- leptons, mesons, baryons...) with different accuracy.
-
- Sven
-
-