Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sri-unix!mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA From: mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA Newsgroups: net.physics Subject: Re: Re: Faster than Light Message-ID: <362@sri-arpa.ARPA> Date: Mon, 8-Jul-85 22:04:06 EDT Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.362 Posted: Mon Jul 8 22:04:06 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 12-Jul-85 04:57:55 EDT Lines: 22 From: mikes@AMES-NAS.ARPA (Peter Mikes) The vawe function in the Schrodinger Equation differs from the Amplitude of the electromagnetic field (E and H or F(n,m)) of the Max- vell equations in the assumption of the existence of a discrete particle. If concept of photon is considered together with Maxwell's eq., then same problem and same paradoxes appear. As remarked recently, this is indeed the same discussion which Bohr had with Einstein, but contrary to the conclusion stated in that remark, it far from being is over. Some people believe that Einstein was right, rather then Bohr. I suggest that we do accept the fact that there is indeed a division of opinion concerning the interpretation of psi function of QM and concerning the queastion whether QM is paradox free and logicaly consistent. Some people prefer not to see or face the problems - that's fine - but lets stop pa- rroting the statement that 'all is fine and there is no paradox'. Some people believe that there are serious problems in the foundations of Q.M. and that's fine too. Thye discussion should proceed by examination of the (alleged) problems and paradoxes - not just by stating that there is/ or is not a problem. Peter M