StephenLawrence - 01 September 2013 01:11 AM

I’m afraid if he has he was pushed. I Think you and Gdb need to honestly think about the motivation behind your posts on this thread. Was it cyber bullying? Was the aim to humiliate Scott for your pleasure?

Regrettably it is so, because of a deep conceptual chasm between Scott and them.

This is the result of thinking of reality as static existing objects rather than as relations.

From http://afterxnature.blogspot.com/p/process-relational-thought-guide.html

Process metaphysics, in general, seeks to elucidate the developmental nature of reality, emphasizing becoming rather than static existence or being. It also stresses the inter-relatedness of all entities. Process describes reality as ultimately made up of experiential events rather than enduring inert substances.

For instance, in the Double-slit experiment, instead of the wave-particle duality, we can alternatively consider it from a relational perspective instead.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

**Relational interpretation**

According to the relational interpretation of quantum mechanics, first proposed by Carlo Rovelli, observations such as those in the double-slit experiment result specifically from the interaction between the observer (measuring device) and the object being observed (physically interacted with), **not any absolute property possessed by the object.** In the case of an electron, if it is initially “observed” at a particular slit, then the observer–particle (photon–electron) interaction includes information about the electron’s position. This partially constrains the particle’s eventual location at the screen. If it is “observed” (measured with a photon) not at a particular slit but rather at the screen, then there is no “which path” information as part of the interaction, so the electron’s “observed” position on the screen is determined strictly by its probability function. This makes the resulting pattern on the screen the same as if each individual electron had passed through both slits. It has also been suggested that space and distance themselves are relational, and that an electron can appear to be in “two places at once”—for example, at both slits—because its spatial relations to particular points on the screen remain identical from both slit locations.

There is thus no wave-particle duality per se, only the relations as such.

Similarly, for the mass-energy equivalence of Einstein’s E = mc^2.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence

A physical system has a property called energy and a corresponding property called mass; the two properties are equivalent in that they are always both present in the same (i.e. constant) proportion to one another.

Mass-energy relation:

The equivalence is described by the famous equation:

E = mc^2

where E is energy, m is mass, and c is the speed of light. Thus, this **mass-energy relation** states that the universal proportionality factor between equivalent amounts of energy and mass is equal to the speed of light squared.

There is thus no mass-energy duality, only the mass-energy relation.

What is relational quantum mechanics (RQM)?

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relational_quantum_mechanics

Relational quantum mechanics (RQM) is an interpretation of quantum mechanics which treats the state of a quantum system as being observer-dependent, that is, the state is the relation between the observer and the system.

EPR and quantum non-locality:

RQM provides an unusual solution to the EPR paradox. Indeed, it manages to dissolve the problem altogether, inasmuch as there is no superluminal transportation of information involved in a Bell test experiment: the principle of locality is preserved inviolate for all observers.

So, thinking of reality as dynamic relations instead of static existence can resolve/dissolve many dualities and paradoxes.