From: seki.hajime01@gmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 12:04:50 PM UTC+9, Nicolaas Vroom wrote:   
   > On Friday, 27 January 2017 19:15:21 UTC+1, Jos Bergervoet  wrote:   
   >   
   > > Why can't   
   > > the QM state vector be something real? Why can't it be the   
   > > complete description of reality?!   
   >   
   > A state vector is never something real. It is mathematics.   
   > A complete description of the reality does not exist.   
   > Laws are also a description of the reality. In fact each law   
   > of a small part of the reality.   
   >   
   > > >>  ...  My point is that the wave function actually tells   
   > > >> you nothing about how the particle gets there.   
   > > >   
   > > > Again I agree with you   
   > >   
   > > How can you be sure particles exist? If we accept that the   
   > > QM state vector (generalized name for "wave function" in   
   > > cases of a general superposition of multi-particle states)   
   > > is all of reality, then there is no need to include any   
   > > other concept. You first need to prove to us that it is   
   > > necessary.   
   >   
   > We know that there are particles by performing experiments.   
   > Demonstrating superpositions also requires performing specific   
   > experiments.   
   > A "wave function" is a tool to describe the results of experiments   
   > but it does not help to understand the experiments.   
   >   
      
   What is meant by "particles by performing experiments"?   
      
   I consider each of them as a quantum localized in a small area   
   (e.g. an electron captured in a molecule, a nucleon in a nucleus,   
   a quark in a nucleon, ...).  So, they can be identified as waves,   
   not particles.   
      
   If this is not the case, please explain.   
      
   Thanks in advance.   
      
   SEKI   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)