Waves and Particles

In psychological discourse, the two dimensions are those of subjectivity and objectivity. Therefore every aspect of reality that impacts on consciousness has both a subjective component and an objective component to it.

To remove any paradox, we need to analyse reality in terms of the two dimensions of subjectivity and objectivity. In relation to matter, the subjective component is the wave and the objective component is the particle. To fully understand what this view means, we first need to understand the primary meaning of relativity. Why is this understanding needed? Because the subjectivity of a particle is a relative subjectivity, whilst its objectivity is a relative objectivity. Relative concepts are not easy to understand.[¹]

University of Reading

From 1964 to 1967, I studied physics at the University of Reading. I was fascinated with the world of atomic phenomena. Nevertheless, at that time I felt that physicists were going in the wrong direction in their attempts to understand this world. I felt that the focus on pursuing a seemingly-endless succession of unstable and transient particles could only lead down a blind alley. This feeling has never left me. I always preferred the ideas of Arthur Eddington. My poor mathematical and analytical abilities did not allow me to pinpoint what I felt was wrong about particle physics. Thirty years later my analytical ability had grown but not my skills in mathematics. So I managed to clarify qualitatively some of my disagreements.

In the twentieth century the difficulty with understanding the nature of light has been extended to include all atomic matter. In some experiments atomic particles can act as if they are discrete pieces of matter, like microscopic billiard balls. Their behaviour is not totally predictable and so probability equations have to be used in order to quantify the results. In other experiments, for example those involving diffraction, the particles act like a wave; now it is almost as if the particles only have a group or relational existence. This group existence has been likened to a web of relationships.

Electrons and other particles are assumed to have “matter” waves associated with them. Every piece of matter has its own wave. Why do some experiments highlight the particle (the piece of matter), and other experiments the wave? How can a particle behave like a wave, and how can a wave behave like a particle? If both forms of behaviour are legitimately real, which they seem to be, then how can we resolve the paradoxical behaviour? Where does the fault-line in theory reside?

In my view, a paradox does not indicate a fault in reality, but a fault in the conceptual framework within which the paradox appears.

The paradox indicates that the way of understanding present-day atomic physics is faulty. From this point of view, when an accurate theory of atomic phenomena is finally formulated, it will contain no paradoxes.

The Double-Slit Experiment

A famous experiment in physics is the double-slit experiment, where a beam of light is shone on a screen with two parallel slits in it. The beam of light passes through the slits and is focused on another screen. The resulting image comes in two forms: either an interference pattern is formed that suggests that the light beam is acting as a wave, or else a non-interference pattern is shown that suggests the light is acting as a beam of physical particles. This experiment has baffled every physicist who has studied it. But the answer is surprisingly simple.

The answer has to be related to consciousness and relativity (my view of relativity, which is different from Einstein's view of it). If the experimenter thinks that the experiment will show the dominance of particle theory, then that is what the result will show. If, however, he thinks that an interference pattern will show, then that is what will be shown. Consciousness has two axes, which are subjectivity and objectivity. The subjective axis will reflect the subjective aspect of reality, which is the wave theory, while the objective axis will reflect the objective aspect of reality, which is the particle. A beam of light has both a subjective reality and an objective reality to it. Whichever reality the experimenter's consciousness focuses on, will be the reality that is highlighted by the experiment. However, this fact cannot be accepted by academia, since consciousness does not form a part of academic thinking. There is another difficulty to face as well. The subjective reality is actually a relative subjectivity, whilst the objective reality is actually a relative objectivity. I explain these terms below.

Binary Frameworks

Paradoxes in theories of matter are no different from metaphysical paradoxes within philosophy. I consider that my understanding of paradoxes points the way to attaining a correct understanding of atomic phenomena. Why does a paradox occur? Where is the misconception in current theory? The primary error is in assuming that all phenomena, including atomic phenomena, are unitary ones. Whereas, in my view, all phenomena are binary ones in the way that they appear to us.

A binary framework means that a theory needs two axes in order to explain or interpret phenomena. What happens when both axes are rolled indiscriminately into one, that is, when thinking becomes one-dimensional? If we do this to ideas about consciousness, then we lose the ability to understand a person. All we can do is observe his behaviour; we cannot understand his motivation for getting out of bed in the morning.

The same thing happens with philosophy and with atomic phenomena. When both axes of description are rolled into one, then we get the paradoxes of the antinomies and the paradox of the nature of the atomic particle.[²]. Conversely, we can resolve the paradoxes by switching from one perspective to two perspectives. The meaning of a paradox is that we are not using enough perspectives or axes in our conceptual framework.

When experiments give rise to contradictory results then the theory that attempts to explain these results needs to have more than one perspective. The contrariness in the results indicates that the experimental paradigm follows only one axis of explanation. The two axes of explanation that are needed have effectively been rolled into one. In order to make the results intelligible, the theorist needs to accept that one result arises from one axis of explanation and the other result from another axis. Within twentieth-century theories of science there is no room for two axes of explanation. Hence such contrary phenomena remain inexplicable. Therefore, to remove the paradoxes from atomic theory, we need to put all relevant ideas within a binary framework.

The answer to the wave-particle paradox requires an understanding of my view of relativity. Reality is relative, and so everything within it has both a subjective component and an objective component to it. Hence any theory of matter necessarily requires two axes, one for each component.

Waves and Particles are Relative

The particles are part of a relative existence. The particles are tied to the wave by relativity. In this paradox, one factor is a relative subjectivity and the other is a relative objectivity. Which is which? The particle is an object, a piece of matter; hence it is the relative objectivity. This leaves the wave as the relative subjectivity.

The objective component of relativity is the particle.
The subjective component of relativity is the wave.

The wave of a particle is its subjective component whereas the particle is the objective component. Within the atom the electron is objective and the diffraction waves indicate subjective relationships between the electrons. Wave and particle exist only in relation to each other – neither wave nor particle on its own can be real. When the wave ceases the particle ceases as well. Anything without a corresponding wave is purely objective and non-relative: it has never been seen and cannot be imagined. Any wave without a corresponding objectivity is purely subjective, and exists only in the mind of the thinker.

I give an analogy to demonstrate the reality of relative subjectivity. If I drop a stone into a calm pond, ripples will be created in the water. These ripples will travel across the pond surface. However, it is not water that is travelling across the surface but only the wave. The water just moves up and down to produce crests and troughs as the ripple passes over it. The water, by moving up and down, is acting like particles. Whereas the ripple is the wave; the wave is subjective but it is real and not imaginery.

Language Problems

The difficulty for physicists in trying to understand what happens inside the atom or what happens between particles is due to faulty comprehension of terminology. They fail to understand the philosophical meanings of the terms objectivity, subjectivity, and relativity. And they fail to understand the way that these terms relate to each other.

A common failing is to assume that only something which is purely objective can exist. The physicist is forced to decide which is objective, the particle or the wave. In some modern interpretations (Capra) the wave is thought to be real, since it is more amenable to mathematical procedures, and so only systems of relationships are considered. Since the electron and other particles are treated as being subjective, so physicists assume that they cannot picture these particles as being real existents. Whereupon the phenomena occurring inside the atom cease to have any comparison to the everyday world of nature. Individual particles (though necessary for some mathematical operations and some kinds of experiments) become solely a product of the scientist’s imagination, and only a web or system of relationships seems to be real. Whence mathematics becomes the only way to handle particle reality. Particle physics becomes a mysterious, incomprehensible world beyond the powers of language to describe.

However, this view largely disappears once terminology is properly understood, once subjectivity ceases to be an insurmountable problem. Particles are the objective component of relativity. Relationships between particles are the subjective components. The point to understand is that the particles are not subjective but objective. It is the waves that are subjective; but this subjectivity is a relative one, hence they have real existence. Particle physics becomes what it has always been – a game of high-energy billiards played with particles that actually exist.

It is no longer necessary to rely solely on mathematical equations in order to explain and describe atomic phenomena. Understanding the relativity of matter resolves the conflict within physics as to which is real: particles or a web of relationships. The web of relationships certainly exists, but so too do individual particles.

[¹]. A description of relativity, from my viewpoint (which is different from Einstein's viewpoint), is given in the article The Ego and Relativity. [1]

The copyright is mine, and the articles are free to use. They can be reproduced
anywhere, so long as the source is acknowledged.

Ian Heath
London, UK

If you want to contact me, use the address at the bottom of the Home page.

Also, since there are numerous articles on this site, please include the title of the article if you want me to clarify or discuss particular issues.

It may be a few days before I can respond to correspondence.

.	Confusion in Physics From the time of Newton and Huygens onwards, a major difficulty arose in physics. Sometimes light streams acted as particles, and at other times they acted as waves. How could light act in contradictory ways? This difficulty continues to baffle modern physicists. In my view, the particle/wave puzzle of light demonstrates that the nature of reality is a dual one: reality exists in two dimensions, and so our understanding of reality has to embrace this fact. If reality has two dimensions, then everything in it must also have two dimensions. Consciousness is a feature of reality, and so consciousness must exist in two dimensions too. In metaphysical discourse, the two dimensions are called Being and Becoming.
Sub - Headings
University of Reading
The Double-Slit Experiment
Binary Frameworks
Waves and Particles are Relative
Language Problems
References