In this paper, we consider three landmark experiments of quantum physics and discuss the related wave particle duality paradox. We present a formalization, in terms of formal logic, of single photon self-interference. We show that the wave particle duality paradox appears, from the logic point of view, in the form of two distinct fallacies: the hard information fallacy and the exhaustive disjunction fallacy. We show that each fallacy points out some fundamental aspect of quantum physical systems and we present a logic solution to the paradox.
In this paper, we consider three landmark experiments of quantum physics and discuss the related wave particle duality paradox. We present a formalization, in terms of formal logic, of single photon self-interference. We show that the wave particle duality paradox appears, from the logic point of view, in the form of two distinct fallacies: the hard information fallacy and the exhaustive disjunction fallacy. We show that each fallacy points out some fundamental aspect of quantum physical systems and we present a logic solution to the paradox.
The simplest but deepest questions of the philosophy of quantum mechanics are these: Are quantum systems waves, or are they particles? Are they both or are they neither? When light bounces an electron out of the surface of an alkali metal it behaves like a particle. Light carries momentum but also a punch. Just as there is no such thing as half a punch, so there is no such thing as half a quantum of light. On the other hand, the shadow formed on a screen by an object has soft edges, edges which get softer as the object is moved away from the screen. Light exhibits the phenomena of diffraction and interference and so is wavelike. This dual behaviour of light, and indeed of matter itself, is called wave-particle duality. The wave nature of a quantum system is reflected in wave mechanics which assigns a wave-function to the system. But the dual nature of light was noticed before Schrodinger developed the wave-mechanical formalism in 1926. In fact, it goes back at least as far as Einsteins explanation of the photoelectric effect in 1905. Wave-particle duality is not something that arises within the quantum mechanical formalism. It is something which is expressed within it, and is something which is best discussed in terms of the paradoxes that quantum experiments force upon physics. In fact, the simplest and most immediately disturbing of the quantummechanical paradoxes arise out of wave-particle duality. We take the two-slit experiment and the delayed-choice experiment as examples.
The wave-particle duality is a fundamental property of the nature. At the same time, it is one of the greatest mysteries of modern physics. This gave rise to a whole direction in quantum physics - the interpretation of quantum mechanics. The Wiener experiments demonstrating the wave-particle duality of light are discussed. It is shown that almost all interpretations of quantum mechanics allow explaining the double-slit experiments, but are powerless to explain the Wiener experiments. The reason of the paradox, associated with the wave-particle duality is analyzed. The quantum theory consists of two independent parts: (i) the dynamic equations describing the behavior of a quantum object (for example, the Schrodinger or Maxwell equations), and (ii) the Born’s rule, the relation between the wave function and the probability of finding the particle at a given point. It is shown that precisely the Born’s rule results in paradox in explaining the wave-particle duality. In order to eliminate this paradox, we propose a new rational interpretation of the wave-particle duality and associated new rule, connecting the corpuscular and wave properties of quantum objects. It is shown that this new rational interpretation of the wave-particle duality allows using the classic images of particle and wave in explaining the quantum mechanical and optical phenomena, does not result in paradox in explaining the doubleslit experiments and Wiener experiments, and does not contradict to the modern quantum mechanical concepts. It is shown that the Born’s rule follows immediately from proposed new rules as an approximation.
One of the most puzzling consequences of interpreting quantum mechanics in terms of concepts borrowed from classical physics, is the so-called wave-particle duality. Usually, wave-particle duality is illustrated in terms of complementarity between path distinguishability and fringe visibility in interference experiments. In this work, we instead propose a new type of complementarity, that between the continuous nature of waves and the discrete character of particles. Using the probabilistic methods of quantum field theory, we show that the simultaneous measurement of the wave amplitude and the number of photons in the same beam of light is, under certain circumstances, prohibited by the laws of quantum mechanics. Our results suggest that the concept of “interferometric duality'' could be eventually replaced by the more general one of “continuous-discrete duality''.
Abstract One of the cornerstones of quantum physics is the wave nature of matter. It explains experimentally observed effects like interference and diffraction, occurring when an object moves from one place to another along several indistinguishable ways simultaneously. The wave nature disappears when the individual ways are distinguishable. In this case, the particle nature of the object becomes visible. To determine the particle nature quantitatively, the way of the object has to be measured. Here, large progress has been made recently with new techniques, enabling one to investigate single moving atoms in a controlled manner. Two examples are discussed in the following two sections. The first experiment describes an atom interferometer, where the way of the atom is entangled with its internal state. This allows one to explore the origin of wave‐particle duality and perform a quantitative test of this fundamental principle. The second experiment reports on the observation of an atom‐photon molecule, a bound state between an atom and a single photon. A fascinating aspect of this system is that it makes possible to monitor the motion of a single neutral atom in real time.
Wave-particle duality has remained, for more than a century, an unresolved logical problem. Einstein transferred the contradiction into the concept of the photon; the orthodox interpretation deferred it as "complementarity." This article proposes an ontological reinterpretation: what moves as a particle is energy (concentrated at a point); what spreads and interferes is interaction (distributed in space). They are two distinct entities, not two aspects of the same entity. This distinction dissolves the ontological enigmas of duality — retrocausality, destructive interference, and superposition — without abandoning the confirmed equations of the quantum method. The collapse of measurement, following (Flor, 2026a), is dissolved as a characteristic of the probabilistic method. Under the demarcation framework of (Flor, 2026h), the classical formulation of duality violates the non-negotiable pillar of logical consistency; the proposed distinction restores it and occupies the legitimate antechamber of scientific speculation, awaiting the experimental test proposed in Section 10. The proposal connects to the field-medium model (Flor, 2026l), where c is a local property of the field resulting from interactions. The onset of interaction is not limited by c; only its peak is. This produces a falsifiable prediction and the honest acknowledgment that the proposal implies, in principle, the possibility of superluminal transmission of information. The article is programmatic: it dissolves the logical paradox, proposes an experimental test, and defers the quantitative reconstruction of the quantum formalism and the definition of the nature of light to future articles. A note on the originality of the distinction is included in the introduction.
When we consider and analyze physical events with the purpose of creating corresponding mathematical models we often assume that the mathematical apparatus used in modeling, at least the simplest mathematical apparatus, is infallible. In particular, this relates to the use of "infinitely small" and "infinitely large" quantities in arithmetic and the use of Newton Cauchy definitions of a limit and derivative in analysis. We believe that is where the main problem lies in contemporary study of nature. We have introduced a new concept of Observer's Mathematics (see www.mathrelativity.com). Observer's Mathematics creates new arithmetic, algebra, geometry, topology, analysis and logic which do not contain the concept of continuum, but locally coincide with the standard fields. We proved the following theorems: 1) Theorem A (Two-slit interference). Let Ψ1 be a wave from slit 1, Ψ2 - from slit 2, and Ψ = Ψ1 + Ψ2. Then the probability of that Ψ is a wave equals to 0.5; and 2) Theorem B (Wave-particle duality for single photons). If v is small enough, then λ is a random variable.