Piggy read an essay about a physics GRE test once upon a time in a scientific site. For reference.
A professor asked his student a question: why seems a glass has no wave – particle duality? The student answered: its probability wave length is too small and not easy to observe. (Note: the Plank constant h is very small value, the momentum of the glass p is relatively very big, according to the equation λ = h / p, λ should be a very small value.)
The professor kept silent. Perhaps he was thinking why the train would not jump on the trails before stop?
Perhaps the student’s answer was a “standard” one. But the professor seems unsatisfied with it.
The microscopic vs the macroscopic, touchy and feely
Some guys resort to the idea of microscopic – macroscopic to explain the wave – particle duality problem of a glass. They say QM is applicable to microscopic particle, while Relativity is applicable to macroscopic object.
There is a question: anyone can find out the border between the microscopic vs the macroscopic? Perhaps they would have to spend thousands of years to do it…at last get nothing.
How small a molecule can count as microscopic, and how big a molecule can count as macroscopic? Perhaps human can employ high tech to make a glass with only one super polymer…
Some people might say fundamental particles can count as microscopic, while other things can count as macroscopic. Actually the glass is made up of fundamental particles too. If the glass moves in a direction with velocity v, all fundamental particles inside it have a component of velocity v in that direction, then all fundamental particles inside it have a probability wave presentation in that direction, then the glass should have an obvious probability wave presentation in that direction when velocity v declines to a very small value.
The funny thing is actually SR can reflect the movement of fundamental particles in an accelerator very accurately, while QM can’t do that.
The idea of microscopic – macroscopic seems a man’s perception only. It’s research “started from the wrong burst point, then traveled in a long and complicated curve, at last trapped in a blind alley.”
Moreover, why we can’t pursue a unified rule of cosmos?
Or people can have a third way of thinking. Why we can’t suspect whether wave – particle duality always established or not? Originally, the concept of wave – particle duality was a speculation / assumption only. According to some statement, once upon a time, when people knew released photon is “wavicle”, Duc de Broglie initiated a genius – rated ASSUMPTION “all microscopic particles should be wavicle”. Then, the conception of “matter wave” / probability wave appeared on the stage of physics. In philosophy it equals to “the father pig is a good swimmer, then, the little piggy should be a good swimmer too”. Gangster’s logic. Oh Lord, please don’t throw the little piggy into water to do experiment…People mistake some theories as truth, just because they kept hearing them.
If people are willing to resort to the third way of thinking, the answer is already there, very simple, explicit and understandable. Anyone can accelerate the glass to the speed of light c?
In the new era of meta physics & PRESENCE – PROPERTY, we can explain very explicitly why light has wave – particle duality, while a glass not.
An excellent GRE should learn to break through traditional barrier of thought and raise the spirit of innovation.