Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Quantum Connections: Wave-Particle Dualism

Robert L. Nadeau, Menas C. Kafatos

Published Dec 2, 1999• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract The logical framework of complementarity was originally formulated in an effort to resolve some ambiguities concerning wave-particle dualism in quantum physics. The essential paradox of wave-particle dualism is easily demonstrated. View the particle as a point-like something, like the period at the end of this sentence, and the wave as continuous and spread-out. The obvious logical problem is how a particular something localized in space and time, the particle, cari also be the spread-out and continuous something, the wave. Quantum physics not only says unequivocally that quanta exhibit both properties but also provides mathematical formalism governing what we can possibly observe, or “see;” when we coordinate our experience with this reality in actual experiments.

DOI
10.1093/oso/9780195132564.003.0003

Related papers

BEYOND WAVE-PARTICLE DUALITY: AN ONTOLOGICAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN ENERGY AND INTERACTION

Ricardo de la Flor

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.

•Oct 12, 2026•0 citations

The nature of particle–wave complementarity

Wendell G. Holladay

To resolve the challenges (paradoxes) attending the genesis of quantum theory, Niels Bohr in 1927 proposed a generalization of the conceptual framework of classical physics, termed complementarity, which posited pairs of classical concepts that could be manifested only in mutually exclusive experimental arrangements with both needed to embrace the full range of physical experience. In this context particle–wave complementarity has encountered two major obstacles; (1) No formulation of it has commanded a general consensus; and (2) empirical evidence abounds that contradicts the claim of mutual exclusivity of particle and wave properties of quantum objects in a single experiment. These problems are rooted in the unrestricted scope of this claim. It is shown that a restricted version of particle–wave complementarity, here called “which value–interference” complementarity, is consistent with observations, is naturally contained in the mathematical formalism of quantum theory and, in fact, holds in any representation of quantum theory defined by the eigenvectors of a complete set of commuting observables, such as the configuration space position (kinematic) variables or the complementary linear momentum (dynamic) variables. Thus, the which value–interference form of particle–wave complementarity exists within kinematic–dynamic complementarity, a “layered” complementarity, so to speak. It is hoped that a consistent and valid exposition of particle–wave complementarity will be helpful to those who find the framework of complementarity useful and appropriate for some purpose.

American Journal of Physics•Jan 1, 1998•18 citations

On the Essence of Wave-Particle Duality

Jiaqing Yan

The traditional theory of wave-particle duality holds that microscopic particles are both particles and waves. This view arises from the limitations of early experimental techniques, which equate the statistical wave behavior of a large number of particles directly with the essential properties of a single particle, leading to problems such as logical inconsistency and vague physical picture. Based on modern single-particle emission experiments and basic physical logic, this paper proposes a new explanation: the essential nature of microscopic particles is always particle, not wave; the observed wave property originates from the inherent, continuous, and omnidirectional tiny vibration of particles themselves, which is an external manifestation of particle motion rather than an intrinsic attribute. The strength of a particle’s wave property is closely related to its mass: the smaller the mass, the more significant the vibration and the stronger the wave property; the larger the mass, the weaker the vibration and the less obvious the wave property. Wave-like phenomena such as double-slit interference are the statistical distribution results of landing positions caused by the inherent vibration of numerous particles. This paper reconstructs the physical essence of wave-particle phenomena with concise and self-consistent logic, providing a more intuitive and unified new idea for understanding the microscopic world.

•Apr 2, 2026•0 citations

A model of quantum reality

Eduardo V. Flores

Here we propose a model of particles and fields based on the mathematical framework of quantum physics. Our model is an interpretation of quantum physics that treats particles and fields as physically real. We analyze four experiments on wave-particle duality that pose paradoxes. We show that within our model these paradoxes are resolved.

arXiv:1305.6219•May 27, 2013•0 citations

On the logic resolution of the wave particle duality paradox in quantum mechanics (Extended abstract)

Nait Abdallah, M.A.

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.

•Apr 13, 2016•0 citations

The Physical Nature of Wave/Particle Duality

Marcello Cini

1.1 Waves and particles in quantum mechanics In spite of the fact that the extraordinary progress of experimental techniques make us able to manipulate at will systems made of any small and well defined number of atoms, electrons and photons making therefore possible the actual performance of the gedankenexperimente that Einstein and Bohr had imagined to support their opposite views on the physical properties of the wavelike/particlelike objects (quantons) of the quantum world it does not seem that, after more than eighty years, a unanimous consensus has been reached in the physicist's community on how to understand their strange properties. Unfortunately, we cannot know whether Feynman would still insist in maintaining his famous sentence It is fair to say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. We can only discuss if, almost thirty years after his death, some progress towards this goal has been made. I believe that this is the case. I will show in fact that, by following the suggestions of Feynman himself, some clarification of the old puzzles can be achieved. This chapter therefore by no means is intended to provide an impartial review of the present status of the question but is focused on the exposure of the results of more than twenty years of research of my group in Rome, which in my opinion provide a possible way of connecting together at the same time the random nature of the events at the atomic level of reality and the completeness of their probabilistic representation by the principles of Quantum Mechanics.

InTech eBooks•Feb 24, 2012•4 citations
Abstract The logical framework of complementarity was originally formulated in an effort to resolve some ambiguities concerning wave-particle dualism in quantum physics. The essential paradox of wave-particle dualism is easily demonstrated. View the particle as a point-like something, like the period at the end of this sentence, and the wave as continuous and spread-out. The obvious logical problem is how a particular something localized in space and time, the particle, cari also be the spread-out and continuous something, the wave. Quantum physics not only says unequivocally that quanta exhibit both properties but also provides mathematical formalism governing what we can possibly observe, or “see;” when we coordinate our experience with this reality in actual experiments.
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.
To resolve the challenges (paradoxes) attending the genesis of quantum theory, Niels Bohr in 1927 proposed a generalization of the conceptual framework of classical physics, termed complementarity, which posited pairs of classical concepts that could be manifested only in mutually exclusive experimental arrangements with both needed to embrace the full range of physical experience. In this context particle–wave complementarity has encountered two major obstacles; (1) No formulation of it has commanded a general consensus; and (2) empirical evidence abounds that contradicts the claim of mutual exclusivity of particle and wave properties of quantum objects in a single experiment. These problems are rooted in the unrestricted scope of this claim. It is shown that a restricted version of particle–wave complementarity, here called “which value–interference” complementarity, is consistent with observations, is naturally contained in the mathematical formalism of quantum theory and, in fact, holds in any representation of quantum theory defined by the eigenvectors of a complete set of commuting observables, such as the configuration space position (kinematic) variables or the complementary linear momentum (dynamic) variables. Thus, the which value–interference form of particle–wave complementarity exists within kinematic–dynamic complementarity, a “layered” complementarity, so to speak. It is hoped that a consistent and valid exposition of particle–wave complementarity will be helpful to those who find the framework of complementarity useful and appropriate for some purpose.
The traditional theory of wave-particle duality holds that microscopic particles are both particles and waves. This view arises from the limitations of early experimental techniques, which equate the statistical wave behavior of a large number of particles directly with the essential properties of a single particle, leading to problems such as logical inconsistency and vague physical picture. Based on modern single-particle emission experiments and basic physical logic, this paper proposes a new explanation: the essential nature of microscopic particles is always particle, not wave; the observed wave property originates from the inherent, continuous, and omnidirectional tiny vibration of particles themselves, which is an external manifestation of particle motion rather than an intrinsic attribute. The strength of a particle’s wave property is closely related to its mass: the smaller the mass, the more significant the vibration and the stronger the wave property; the larger the mass, the weaker the vibration and the less obvious the wave property. Wave-like phenomena such as double-slit interference are the statistical distribution results of landing positions caused by the inherent vibration of numerous particles. This paper reconstructs the physical essence of wave-particle phenomena with concise and self-consistent logic, providing a more intuitive and unified new idea for understanding the microscopic world.
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.
1.1 Waves and particles in quantum mechanics In spite of the fact that the extraordinary progress of experimental techniques make us able to manipulate at will systems made of any small and well defined number of atoms, electrons and photons making therefore possible the actual performance of the gedankenexperimente that Einstein and Bohr had imagined to support their opposite views on the physical properties of the wavelike/particlelike objects (quantons) of the quantum world it does not seem that, after more than eighty years, a unanimous consensus has been reached in the physicist's community on how to understand their strange properties. Unfortunately, we cannot know whether Feynman would still insist in maintaining his famous sentence It is fair to say that nobody understands quantum mechanics. We can only discuss if, almost thirty years after his death, some progress towards this goal has been made. I believe that this is the case. I will show in fact that, by following the suggestions of Feynman himself, some clarification of the old puzzles can be achieved. This chapter therefore by no means is intended to provide an impartial review of the present status of the question but is focused on the exposure of the results of more than twenty years of research of my group in Rome, which in my opinion provide a possible way of connecting together at the same time the random nature of the events at the atomic level of reality and the completeness of their probabilistic representation by the principles of Quantum Mechanics.