Wave-Particle Duality – Micro concept with macro implications

The wave-particle duality refers to a contradiction that arises when we try to understand the nature of light.

Girls demonstrating wave-particle duality.
Girls demonstrating wave-particle duality by James Guppy via Flickr

Light can be either a wave (energy) or particle (matter), depending on the way we observe and interpret it. Some even try to combine the concepts of energy and matter to say that light is a “wavicle.”¹

Albert Einstein had this to say:

It seems as though we must use sometimes the one theory and sometimes the other, while at times we may use either. We are faced with a new kind of difficulty. We have two contradictory pictures of reality; separately neither of them fully explains the phenomena of light, but together they do.²

Philosophers of science believe the duality is created by the way we use language. And the apparent conflict might be reconciled if we consider what language is and does.

Language, they say, not only describes but also influences our understanding of things spoken and written about. So with a kind of circularity, the way we describe our world in turns shapes our worldview.

Consider the moon, for instance. To an Apollo astronaut it is something to travel to, orbit and possibly walk on. For an ancient Roman, the moon might be seen as a somewhat mysterious place where the goddess Luna resides or as an aspect of the pagan goddesses Diana or Juno.

In ancient Iran, the moon was believed to be “The Great Man” who periodically incarnates on Earth. And in the recent past, the moon was whimsically said to be made of blue cheese.

In each of these examples, the words and the semantic context within which the occur shape the understanding of the thing described. We have to keep this is mind not only when studying myth and religion but in any aspect of life—ancient or modern. Culture isn’t just created. It also creates.³

We can overcome the wave-particle duality by realizing that it is informed by the way we categorize reality, but this might be a hollow victory because it doesn’t tell us much about the actual essence of light, energy or matter—or even if these phenomena have a true ‘essence.’

At some point language becomes inadequate. And many believe that sciences, which also use symbol systems like mathematics and physics, are equally as imperfect to the task of describing reality.

From this, the holistic thinker Peter Russell argues that we should not confuse the proverbial map (scientific concepts and theories) with the thing mapped (alleged fundamental aspects of creation).

The debate about describing vs the described can get pretty complicated. Some maintain that language is, in fact, adequate and an integral part of reality. Others say this argument falls short when we consider how meanings have changed throughout history.

Is truth always relative or is there something absolute, essential or permanent in our world? These basic questions may seem abstruse. But the way we unconsciously answer them in our daily assumption/decision making process no doubt informs many aspects of life.

So I think it’s better to be aware of our uncertainties and biases. Question everything. That way we don’t put the world – and other people – in an artificially small box. When people try to do that, what we’re really seeing is a picture of their provincial outlook.

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality#Neither-wave-nor-particle_view

² https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality Follow this link for a good, brief history » https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality#Brief_history_of_wave_and_particle_viewpoints

³ That’s why many poststructural social thinkers argue that power is creative, not just repressive.

Related » George Berkeley, Brahman, Albert Einstein, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, John Locke, Poststructuralism, Erwin Schrödinger, Semiology, Tao, Thomas Young



  1. After studying physics (among other things) at university, I became a software developer. A common concept here is “interface” (cf. e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_interface), which provides exactly the kind of thinking needed here:

    A cannon ball implements the “particle” interface, a wave on the ocean the “wave” interface, and, e.g., a photon both. This is very illustrative when a class diagram is drawn (more so than in this brief statement), but such a diagram would be hard to understand for the reader without previous knowledge.

    (Arguably, the cannon ball, too, implements “wave”; however, the effects are too small for practical observation.)

    Liked by 1 person

      • The world is full of effects (e.g. relativistic changes, Heisenberg’s uncertaintity principle) that are valid in general, but are not observable in every day life (we move too slowly compared to each other, objects are too large).

        In my recollection, this applies to the wave-particle duality too: Canon balls, e.g., behave like waves. For example, they would cause an interference patter similar _in principle_ to that of photons in a two slit experiment. However, they are so large that this pattern is not detectable.

        I have to make a reservation, however: I last had contact with the wp duality around 1996, and I could be wrong. (Not counting the odd popular-science discussion—these are often too oversimplified to be trusted.)

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thanks for your reply. I guess we could say that even though some macro effects are not easy to observe, they are conceivable.

        There’s also the issue of a possible continuity between micro and macro but with only some individuals equipped to perceive it. I’m talking about intuitives, sensitives, contemplatives, etc. Their interior perceptions might not be demonstrable in a lab. But they might be demonstrable in some other way.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Amit Goswami says:
    The possibility wave of a macro object spreads between measurements, but it spreads very slowly–so slowly that it is appreciable only at time scales comparable to the age of our universe…Macro objects are quantum possibility waves. They do spread. Recently, thanks to the accuracy of measurement possible today with laser technology, a one-ton apparatus was found to spread in a short time by one hundred thousand trillionth of a centimeter.
    from _The Visionary Window_

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Yeah I think we’re only scratching the surface of what humanity could be capable of in the future. It’s exciting to contemplate. Enter Sci-Fi and my love for it. Fantasy to some degree too. Thanks for your comment and have a great day!


What are you thinking?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.