Talk:Afshar experiment/Archive 2

message: My question is not related to Danko Georgiev, and please don't kill me because I am at the moment not a professional physics student (I am math and electrical engineering). It appears from the article that Unruh's main objection is that Afshar is interpreting two measurements as one in which the light acts as both a wave and a particle. Unruh says it is two different measurements and in one (the detector) it seems particle, and in the other it is a wave since the light is interfering around the wire. If Unruh is right, then what constitutes a legitimate measurement that would show a violation of complementarity? A single measurement in which you get wave and particle behavior? What does 'a single measurement' mean? Bananaclaw 03:05, 16 May 2005
: Dear Bananaclaw, Please post your question on my Blog   , and I'll answer it there. Let's keep these questions off of the Wikipedia pages. Thanks.-- Afshar 17:11, 16 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misc 

message: Most of the controversy section looks like an active debate on these pages, original research and so unencyclopedic at this stage.  Should it be removed and replaced with a two line summary and external links?--Henrygb 16:41, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear Henrygb, According to Wikipedia guidlines, delineated in Original research, at worst Afshar experiment falls under the category of "the ideas [that] have become newsworthy: they have been independently reported in newspapers or news stories", due to the numerous news media oultlets that have covered this work, and hence can be posted on Wikipedia. However I do agree with your sentiment that the Controversy section seems somewhat like a back-and-forth discussion rather than an encyclopedic article. Perhaps the Controversy section should be put together along with the Afshar Experiment and the Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics page under a new page titled Afshar Experiment: Contoversy and Interpreations? I would appreciate your suggestions to that end.--Afshar 18:38, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For what it's worth, my recent contribution, since removed, was in part an attempt to summarize and encyclopedify the article. I left the existing back-and-forth discussion in place only because I didn't have time to read, understand and summarize it. I think this page should remain for the reasons Afshar gave: it is an experiment that has received a lot of publicity in the popular press. I think that people who come to Wikipedia for more information ought to find a well-written article which, among other things, explicitly mentions and corrects some of the errors that have been made in other media accounts. That's what I was (am) trying to do. -- BenRG 20:54, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research

message: I propose to remove the remainder after "complementarity" with something like
:Various critiques of Afshar's claim have been posted on the internet by the well-known physicists Unruh of UBC link and Motl of Harvard link as well as others links.   Afsher addresses some of these in his blog link.
A few words in the introduction bother me, particularly  "many physicists" are skeptical which I believe should be "most physicists" are skeptical.  However, I have not conducted a scientific poll, and I am sure that fact would be brought to my attention.
I hope this is the last I ever see of this page.  
I also hope this serves as a lesson to anybody else that has the bright idea of creating a page on unpublished research. --CSTAR 16:33, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Final edits