Quantum Physics another example of Peirce’s Triadic Theory
Quantum physics made some fascinating discoveries on the world of the
Infinitesimal Small (it is also called the physics of the particles! The smallest particles of
matter: such as the atom and sub-atomic particles) in fact researchers found that at this
level of really small “objects”, particles observation and calculation of their behavior under
experimental conditions are almost impossible! Not because the particles are so small that
they cannot be seen no! Researchers have built very complicated and sophisticated
microscopes (machines) that give them the possibility to see these particles very clearly!
However, the problem arises when we try to follow and observe a particle! It seems that no
one, to this day can, predict, anticipate or guess or even calculate the place and the
behavior of a particle when following the path it takes. It is always only a matter of
possibility how this particle will behave! It changes course at the moment we try
to ‘pinpoint’ it! As if, the researcher (observer)’s intent (or consciousness effects the
behavior of the particle somehow!!) as if the very act of observing = (trying to
“actualize”) the particle’s behavior interfere with its initial path and alters it!
When the particle is (left alone) in its “context”, let’s take the example of “Light”, we
see that particles behave in a certain manner (like waves) however in other conditions
particle also behave like (physical objects i.e. similarly to “macro-objects”) =/= “not like
waves”) therefore there are too possibilities of being for those tiny little particles! Waves or
objects
However there is no explanation to that, and there is no way to “predict” when it
does (or will) act like (waves) and when it will or (does) act like a “normal object”)
Every time a researches attempts the experiment, to observe one quantum particle
at a time to figure out its path and its place in time and space, The particle shows different
results every time!! When we expect it to act in a way (waves) it act in the opposite one
(particle=object) and when we expect it to follow the other way around it does the contrary!
As if the mere attempt to know its exact location (by observation) brings changes to the
“state and nature” of the observed particle and influences it course of action (and its
course of being)
M.N.F
My personal interpretation here is that small sub-atomic particles resemble
“qualities” they belong to the world of firstness (although they are physical objects or
waves) no one knows which one they really are! They are both, and non at the same time!!
However, no one, not even researchers, can be sure of the nature of the particle without
(before) its manifestation! i.e. [before they follow one at a time and observe it and
therefore (influence it)]
I dare to say that the observer makes an actualization or an instantiation of the
particle when it is observed! Only then the researcher can say this or that particle acts like
one of its 2 possibilities (but never before the experiment!!)
Here we can say that as long as the sub- atomic particle is not (observed=
instantiated which is the only way to force it to manifest itself) which brings it inevitably to
the level of “secondness”: it stays always in the state of firstness which is pure
possibility of being one thing (waves) or another (object) or (both)!
It is amazing how 20th century physics come to prove 19th century Peirce’s theory
true!! It can, only, mean one thing (among others) that Peirce was a visionary who, with
the power of logic and mathematics alone, had “inferred” some things that cannot be
“experienced” unless with “one century later” advanced technology)
M.N.F