>>11910275You are using the false conclusions from a poorly setup experiment to justify barking at any other interpersonal of that experiment. Let me walk you through this step by step.
We want to design an experiment that shows if an electron is a particle or a wave.
We choose to use the double slit experiment.
The assumption is that if an electron is a wave of probabilities then it will create an interference pattern.
Another assumption is that If an electron is just a particle and like a small hard ball it will not have an interference pattern. ( This is actually wrong as I've demonstrated)
We conduct the experiment.
It shows an interference pattern!
Thus the electron is a wave of probabilities!( But this is wrong since a classical hard ball also creates an interference pattern)
50 years later an omega semi-moron on /sci/. Can't even think of a particle as a hard ball, and uses this assumption to stupidly argue against the real results of the double slit experiment.
The real results are that the experiment doesn't prove anything, since a particle or wave will create an interference pattern
