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