claim_arguably@lemdro.id to Ask Science@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agoWhat's a scientific fact that sounds made up but is 100% real?message-squaremessage-square258fedilinkarrow-up1211arrow-down15
arrow-up1206arrow-down1message-squareWhat's a scientific fact that sounds made up but is 100% real?claim_arguably@lemdro.id to Ask Science@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agomessage-square258fedilink
minus-squareWigners_friend@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoBut it does mean the duality is not logically necessary.
minus-squarecockmushroom@reddthat.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoHonestly, I’d’ve thought it meant the exact opposite.
minus-squareWigners_friend@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months agoWell in de Broglie-Bohm you have a particle and a wave as separate but connected entities. That can’t be a duality (which requires two equally valid but mutually exclusive descriptions).
But it does mean the duality is not logically necessary.
Honestly, I’d’ve thought it meant the exact opposite.
Well in de Broglie-Bohm you have a particle and a wave as separate but connected entities. That can’t be a duality (which requires two equally valid but mutually exclusive descriptions).