Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Viehoff
Whether particles "exist" or not, or whether my "particle" is actually a model in an axiomatic system or not, who cares, in my view. I'm a "just do the sums and don't worry about what it really is" man.
....As to what the thing is that actually is being measured, well sages, priests and philosophers can argue about that, to no useful purpose in my view.
|
I agree that what the "particle actually is" falls outside of physics and is best left to philosophy. It is only when (or if) physics attaches an ultimate reality to such entities that we should start to worry about what this means. As long as physicists are clear in what they mean by "particles" then there is no danger of any misrepresentation in the manner that I
thought may have been the case here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan Viehoff
(1) ....Particles have been observed. To assert otherwise is either to argue for a nontestable theory of existence such as "reality doesn't exist, it's all a dream", or else is vexatious.
|