From: ROY MAYEDA (roymayeda@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Mar 29 2005 - 18:56:07 PST
Message-ID: <20050330025607.84251.qmail@web20424.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 18:56:07 -0800 (PST) From: ROY MAYEDA <roymayeda@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: electron mass
Hi, all.
Could we also perhaps say that we are MODELING the
behavior as either wave or particle, and actually
using both models simultaneously? I had sort of come
to the understanding that the behavior of "very small
things" was not really described by either individual
model (wave or particle), and that using the
combination of the two models did not mean that the
item in question (electron in this case) was REALLY
one or the other, or even both. We simply need both
models to have some framework to discuss observations
and predictions about those items. (i.e. we're not
necessarily limited to "the truth" in science, but
looking for the best model to represent what we see
and think will happen next -- if it turns out to be
reality, so much the better for us)
Just a thought. As Ron pointed out, when we start
getting to explanations of why things are so (and what
constitutes "truth" as well, I suppose), we are
venturing more into metaphysics.
On a personal and regional note, it's over 60 out here
and my wife just swatted the first of the billions of
mosquitoes of the season!
"Oh, ja! Life in da nort wooooods is gut."
:-)
Roy Mayeda
Wheaton High School
Wheaton, MN
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Mon Aug 01 2005 - 16:06:47 PDT