L40     光的“波动说”“微粒说”和“二象性”理论为何长期不能“统一” 

                       陈理士

 提   要   

 关键词   二象性  二象性理论 

(the text in English see rear please)

 1 二象性理论简况

　　光的“二象性”理论的提出是在“波、粒”两种理论分庭抗礼了二百年之后，意图结束这一不合理局面，得到一个正确的关于光的理论。

　　此理论的物理依据是：“波动的和粒子的性质表示同一个现象——光场的两个方面”。　“在不同的例子中，各种光学现象可以用波动观点讨论，也可以用粒子观点讨论”。

　　为了解释光在介面上的折射，提出了 “光粒子经过介面时动量改变”，并对如何改变作出了使之符合实际情况的假定。

　　这一假定加上X射线引起衍射的发现，似乎证明了“光”既有波动性质又有粒子性质，亦即，似乎“二象性”理论有理。为了增加人们对“二象性”理论的置信度，1924年路易德布罗意还提出了“二象性并不特殊地是一个光学的现象，而有一般性的意义”。意思是，事物普遍具有“二象性”。

二象性理论存在的问题

（1）“同一物理事物” 讨论时出现“不同观点”是正常的，问题不在这种讨论，而在如何把握这种讨论。在采用粒子观点讨论光的折射时，为了用粒子模型解释折射，在假定之下，出现了一个等式[img]images/upfile/2010-5/201051383747.jpg[/img]，c是光速，是“光在真空中的速度”，按照讨论[img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img]应当是“光子”在介质中的速度，由上式， [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img]远超过光速c 。得出这一结果，理当反思原来的假定是否存在问题。 实际做法是淡化了这个[img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img] ，说它只是“相速”“ 既不表徵 ‘信号’速度，也不表徵能量运动速度”，一语带过而不再关注。难道光速c就不是相速了吗？为什么c所担任的角色那么不容忽视而c' 就不值一提呢？

　　如果不回避问题，现实的“相速”只出现在“波动”过程中。[img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img]的出现是人为地将“波、粒”搅和在一起的结果。这一结果应当是对于原先假定的质疑，如果没有可靠支持，相当于原来的假定面临了“困难”。

　　X射线在狭缝上引起衍射是否说明它“既是粒子射线又是波”呢？没有那个狭缝X射线的衍射便不会发生。可以相信的乃是，粒子射线在物质表面可以激发出电波，没有物质——在“真空”中——它只能是“电子的射线”，衍射不会发生。

　　任何的“波”都是物质的波动，物质的最小单元是基本粒子，因此，任何物质的波动当然已经是将粒子波动隐含其中，不能说这是“波、粒”的“二象性”，这同“波动的和粒子的性质表示同一个现象——光场的两个方面”不一回事。

“二象性”理论是针对“光”提出的，对于光，现在的“二象性”理论的不妥在于虽然调和了波、粒二论，却未明确机理，甚至缺理，例如上述“相速远大于光速”便缺乏机理、不能得到解释。由此看出，“二象性”理论不能圆满的一斑。

  （2）“二象性”理论给出的“粒子运动的平面波方程”是[img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139435.jpg[/img]，这个复变函数的方程形式完美，将普朗克常数h和粒子的动能p都镶嵌其中，达到了将“波、粒”统一在一个数学方程中的目的。问题在于它的物理意义，仅在 物理现象确实“既是波、又是粒”的情况下才可适用，如果二者缺一，方程便难以实用。上面已提出，X射线不能算“既是波、又是粒”，它乃是电子射线。X射线作为辐射的粒子流，并非绝对不能再传递波，但不能影响它是“电子射线”这一基本性质。

　　“二象性”理论需要举出哪怕一则“既是波又是粒”的物理事物来，使这个方程可以有具体描写对象而获得实际应用，迄今为止，它同那个在此基础上推导出来的著名的薛定谔方程都只是一个数学方程。至今并未发现“既是波又是粒”的“同一事物”。

　　从理论上说，“同一物理事物”是否可能有“两种不同表现”呢？这里是一个需要进一步明确的概念问题。对于“同一物理事物”，不存在两种或多种“区别它们性质的表现”， “同一物理事物”不可能同时“有”两种颜色、形态、硬度、尺度、密度．．．．．．，如果似乎“有”，需要相信“不可能有”，才能分析发现正确理论，找到问题的实质，不陷于误域。为什么“光”就可以同时有两种不同“形态”呢？

　　“波、粒”乃是对于事物两种不同性质的描述。同一事物，同时具有这两种性质是做不到的,这是解释物理现象时需要坚持的原理。

　　不同原子有100多种，而基本粒子只有两种，为什么不强调所有化学元素都是两种基本粒子的“不同表示”呢？因为它们“化学性质”差异不容忽视。可见，在不同性质的“相同物质”间不能划等号，即使在水、冰、汽和大米、稀饭之间，也不应划等号。

　　“光”为什么会使人考虑“二象性”呢，其中一个重要原因是关于“光”的理论未能圆满，当时，对它的面目不如今天看得清楚。关于“波、粒”，可以说，演员是一个：电子。但演出节目有二：一是射线，它是直线运动的粒子；二是波动，无纵向直线运动，只有横向波动。这是性质的不同，不能忽视的界限所在。

　　《L07 光与真空中光速》一文已有所分析，迄今已经在“光”这一名词之下，挤进了性质不同物理事物。本来，“波、粒”两种理论就各有其是、各说其是又各自越界开拓，所以才分庭抗礼，不相协调。“二象性”理论不但依然将它们塞在同一个名词“光”之下，甚至将“二象性”也开拓到“具有普遍意义”，严格的物理理论，有这么大的“弹性”吗？

  （3）“光速”其实是空间电波的“相速”，此速度发生在空间电场中，光速相对地大致“不变”是可能的，因为空间电场大致均匀，但不是绝对均匀，因此，理论上不能认为光速守恒。

　　光速大致不变是空间距离测量的基本条件，不变到了什么程度？这从“测量精度”上反映出来，大约为百万分之一，即[img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139618.jpg[/img]（10-6），现在，光学仪器可能达到的精度要比这高不少，空间电场的不均匀使测量精度受到制约。

　　可见光在空间电场中的传播，应当采用波动理论，空间电场由电子（粒子）矩阵形成这一事实并不影响采用波动模型描述光波，请看波的微分方程方程[img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139727.jpg[/img]以及麦克斯韦方程[img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139818.jpg[/img]中的电场E都隐含了电子这一基本粒子，但这并不影响它们是描述“波”的方程，纯属波动理论。

（4）“到底什么是光”是光理论正确与否的关键。因此，光是否具有“二象性”是“二象性”理论需要理清的前提。

　　电子射线在威尔逊雾室中显示了粒子性质，电子冲击晶体出现干涉条纹是否说明电子有波动性质呢？如果能肯定“是”，可以说“同一个电子”具有“波、粒”两种不同表现。因此，这里需要认真分析。

电子冲击晶体发生的干涉条纹同上述X射线在狭缝上的衍射没有原理上的不同，都是原子外层受到外来电子冲击向空间反馈能量的过程。因为正常原子不能存储这部分外来能量。

　　“波、粒两种物理现象的载体是同一种物质”；而且可以明确，就是电子。但这不足以支持“二象性”理论，如上已述，虽然同由基本粒子组成，但 A元素不等于B元素。

　　“光波”通过三棱镜折射说明那里发生“波速”改变，说明可见光纯粹是物理“波动”，至于波的载体是什么物质在此并不重要。

　　以不能圆满的“二象性”理论为基础，有一则著名的开拓：“测不准关系”，用以解释不能明确肯定微观粒子位置的现象。这能否由此证明“二象性”理论正确呢？不能，因为原子内部的所有粒子都在高速运动之中，现在，利用电子或电波作为检测手段不能发现比原子“小”的物质，这些物质都在高速运动之中而且很小，只能以概率来描述。这是“测不准”的物理背景。

　　因此，不能以此证明“二象性”理论正确而是研究对象的性质使然。相反，在“测不准”的叙述中有：“我们不得不以波和粒子两种图像来描述同一个客体”（“两种”指波、粒，“同一个”指“光”），这里的“不得不”说明了将无线电波、红外波、光波、紫外波、紫外线、X射线、γ射线、宇宙射线等一系列性质并不相同的物理事物“无可奈何”地认为相同，全都将它们按在同一个名词“光”之中。这样偏于简单化的处理必然模糊了应有的界限，相当于说，“不同化学元素都是两种基本粒子的不同图像”，这不是成了同“二象性”相左的“多象性”“理论”吗？

　　当面对氢、氧两种元素时，将它们视为两种物质加以处理呢还是去强调它们“只是基本粒子的两种不同表象”呢？

　　频率低于“紫外”的各种电波，从“波粒”角度，它们只是波，是在电子矩阵中传播的横向波动；紫外线、X射线、γ射线是电子射线；宇宙射线是引力子射线。需要承认它们乃是具有某些共同点的不同事物，这是光学基础理论需要作出的改进，以便使理论贴近实际。

“光”（light），作为一个名词，需要捨去那些“不发光”的电波，让它们归属于“电波”的名词之下。射线就是射线，不能因为射线能在物质上激发电波、出现干涉带就不是射线；

至于“电磁波”，乃是波导内部以及导体附近电流变化引起的引力线外泄，不存在单独的“磁波”，在空间电场和小于原子的物质中也同样不存在磁波。

　　“二象性”理论的出发点是好的，其结论似乎达到了目的，但是，以上分析表明，其理论不能圆其说，真正符合这种理论的物理事物并不存在，因此“二象性”理论不是正确理论。  

　　需要客观的承认，现代物理理论已经在“光”这个名词下塞进了所有的基本粒子的“能态”，如果“先入为主”又要符合实际，“光”应当只用于描述“可见光”，光波、电波、电磁波等名词都可以存在，各种射线同样是客观存在，不能够将它们用“二象性”捏合在一起。

   (2015-11-13 09z增加)： 就是说，“波动说”“微粒说”本来应当针对各自合适的对象，各得其所的应用，分工合作，用于“所有”光电领域。实际却是，“波动说”“微粒说”不仅各执一词、分道扬镳，而且均越界开拓，企图涵盖对方，从而力不从心！这是200年来它俩长期不能“统一”的实况，至此，对于“波、粒二说”，人们还意图去加以“统一”吗？

 2019.3.26注1：本文以上多处出现的 [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139435.jpg[/img]等字符 系2019年以前原先网站架构的软件对于数学方程需要转变为图像处理，在现在网站架构中转化规则已变故显示“原形”，此加注也适用于下面英文部分。  

               注2： 本文于2009/9/28 登上本网站原先架构，2019.1月投入使用的现在的新架构未设计“加入时间、阅读次数”，故加注以保持原貌。

  L40    why the "Wave theory and particles theory of light" can not "unification" for a long time  

[b]Abstract [/b]  the duality theory existing problem on the physical supposing, cause of the knowing was lacking for the nature of the light

[b]Key word 　　 duality  　 the duality theory[/b]

[b]1 the simple situation of the duality theory [/b]

　　Put forward the “duality” theory of light was after 200 years of stand up to sb. As an equal of two kinds of theory of “wave、particle”, intent to finish this unreasonable situation, get a correct theory about the light．

　　The physical basis of this theory is：“the wave’s and particle’s properties show the same phenomenon’s——light field’s two aspects”．“In the different examples, all kinds of optical phenomenon may discuss with wave viewpoint, also may discuss with particle viewpoint”

　　In order to explain light’s refraction on the interface, raise “the momentum of light particle get change when go by the interface”, and for how change make the assumption let it truthfulness．

　　This assumption plus find out X-ray lead to diffractive, it seems prove “light” existing wave properties and also exist particle properties, i.e. seems “duality” theory been reasonable．For increase person’s confidence of “duality” theory, in 1924 victor de Broglie still raise “duality no only to be a optical phenomenon distinguishingly, moreover have the general meaning ”．mean things general have “duality”．

[b] 2 the existing problems of duality theory [/b]

(1) “The same physical thing ” when discuss appear “different viewpoint ” is normal, the problem be not in this discussion, and lei in how hold this discussion．For use particle mode to explain refraction, under the assumption, appear a equation [img]images/upfile/2010-5/201051383747.jpg[/img]，c is light speed, is “light’s speed when in the vacuum”, according to the discussion, [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img] ought to be the speed of “photon” in the medium, by above equation, [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img] far exceed light speed c．obtained such result, should rethink whether the original assumption exist problem．The reality practice is desalt this [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img], say it only been the “phase speed”, “neither show the ‘signal’ speed, nor show the speed of energy motion”, all be going with one speech and no longer pay attention．Could it be said that light speed c as soon as not the phase speed? Why c serve as a character like that not allows ignore and [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img] at once be not worth mentioning?

　　If  not avoid with problem, the realistic “phase speed” only appear in the “wave motion” process, [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139031.jpg[/img] appeared was the result of artificially mixed with “wave、particle”．this result ought to be the query for the original assumption, if not reliable support, amount to the original assumption be faced with “difficulty”．

　　Whether the diffraction of X-ray on the narrow can explain it “since the particle also the wave”? lack of that narrow the diffraction then will not happen．May trusting is, particle’s ray can arouse electric wave on matter face, none matter ——in the vacuum——it is “electron’s ray” only, diffraction will not happen．

　　Any “wave” been the wave of matter, matter’s least unit is the basic particle, therefore, ant matter’s wave surely already implicate particle’s wave in it, cannot to say it is the “duality” of the “wave、particle”, this is not a same thing with “the wave and particle show the same phenomenon——two aspects of light field”．

　　The “duality ” theory is suggested aim at the “light”, for the light, the improper of current “duality” theory lei in though reconciled two theories of wave 、particle, but cannot clear-out the mechanism, even lack of mechanism, such as above “phase speed more large then light speed” was lack mechanism、cannot get explain．From this find out, the one aspect of “duality” cannot satisfactory．

(2) “duality” theory give “the plane wave of particle movement” is [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139435.jpg[/img]，the form of this complex variables functions is perfect, with Planck constant h and particle’s kinetic energy p inlay in it, reach to the aim of with “wave 、particle” unify in one math equation．The question is that physical meaning, only can suit under the physical phenomenon really “to be the wave、also the particle”, if lack the one of both, the equation then difficult to practical．Above has been raise, the X-ray cannot consider “to be the wave、also the particle”, it to be the electron’s ray．X-ray act as radial particle flow, it does not absolute cannot deliver the wave, but this cannot influence on the basic property of it is the “electron’s ray”．

　　“duality” theory need cite even one physical thing of “to be the wave、also the particle”, make this equation may have specific describe object and acquire practical use, so far, it together with that famous Schrodinger equation of deduce out on this base they are all only a math equation．Up to now not find “the same thing” of “to be the wave、also the particle”．

　　From theoretically speaking, if “the same thing” have two kinds of different expression? Over here to be a problem of concept of need clearing．To the “same physical thing”, it does not exists two kinds of expression of “distinguish their properties”, the “same physical thing” may not “have” two kinds of color、shape、hardness、size、density．．．．．．．, if it seems “have”, need to believe “no way have”, so can through analysis find out correct theory, seek out the essence of the problem, don’t fall into the error region．Why the “light” may have two kinds of properties in the same time?

  “wave、particle” to be the description of two kinds of different properties of the thing．The same thing, possess this two kinds of properties in the same time is unable doing, when explain the physical phenomenon this is the principle of need persistent．

　　There are more then 100 kinds of the different atoms, while it have two kinds of the basic particle only, why does not emphasis whole chemical element are all the “different expression” of the two kinds of basic particle? Visible, it cannot equate between “matter in the same component” of different properties, even between the water-ice-steam and the rice-porridge, also cannot equate．

　　Why the “light” make human consider of “duality”? in this the one of important reason is theory of the “light” cannot satisfactory, at that time, to its look, not clearer than today．For the “wave、particle”, as it were, the performer to be one：the electron．But have two items on the program：the one is the ray, it is the particles in linear motion；the second is the wave, it not have lengthways linear motion, only have the crosswise wave motion．This is the difference of properties, must not ignore this location of limits．         

　　It has been analyzed in《L07 light and light velocity in vacuum》，so far it has been under the name of “light”, tucked physical things of different properties．Originally, two kinds of theory of “wave、particle” at once each have its proper、each talk its proper and each cross the border do open up, so that stand up to sb. As an equal, and not coordinate．“duality” theory not only still put them fill in the same name with “light”, even also open up “duality” to “have universal meaning”, does the strict physical theory, have so large “elasticity”?

 （3） “light velocity ”in fact was the “phase velocity” of electric wave in the space, this velocity happen in the space electric field, light velocity relatively roughly “invariant” is possible, because space electric field roughly equality, but it is not absolute equality, therefore, it cannot consider the conservation of light velocity in theory．

　　Light velocity roughly invariant was the basic postulate for space range measurement, what degree for the invariant? This reflect out from “measurement accuracy”, it about for millionth, namely [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139618.jpg[/img]（10-6），modern, the precision of optical instrument can reached would high much then this, uneven of space electric field make measurement accuracy suffer restrict．

　　 Visible light spread in the space electric field, should use the wave theory, the fact of space electric field form from the matrix of electrons (particle) not influence to use the wave model describe light wave, please look to the differential equation of the wave：

 [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139727.jpg[/img]and Maxwell equation：

 [img]images/upfile/2010-5/20105139818.jpg[/img]

　　In these equations，the electric field E all implicated the basic particle of electrons, but this not influence they to be the equation of describe “wave”, ought right belong to wave theory．

（4）“to the end what is the light ” is the key of whether correct for the light theory．Therefore, if the light possess “duality” is the premise of need clear for “duality” theory．

　　Electron radial showed the particle properties in the Wilson fog room, whether electron impact crystal appear interference fringe is explain electron have wave properties? If affirm “yes”, may be say “one and the same electron” possess two kinds of different expression of “wave、particle”．therefore, here need serious analysis．electron impact crystal appear interference fringe is not difference with above X-ray’s diffraction on the narrow sew, are all the energy feedback process towards space when atom’s outer sphere suffer impact from foreign electron．Because the normal atom cannot store this part energy．

　　“The carrier of two kinds of phenomenon of wave、particle is the same matter ”；and can clear-up, exactly to be the electron．But this not enough support “duality” theory, as above already stated, though constituted by the same basic particle, but the element A is not equal to the element B．

　　“Light wave” pass the prism happen refraction explain come about the “wave speed” change over there, it explain the visible light purely is the physical “wave”, as to what is the carrier matter is not important here．

Act as the basis for the “duality” theory of can’t satisfactory, have a famous open up：“uncertainty relation”, use it to explain the phenomenon of cannot explicit affirm the position of micro-particle．Whether from this can prove the “duality” theory is correct? Can’t，because of all particles of atom are in the motion of high speed, now, use electron or electric wave act as detection means cannot find the matter of “less” than atom, these matters are all in the motion of high speed and very small, can but describe they by probability．This is the physical background of “uncertainty”．           

　　So ,it cannot prove “duality” theory is right with this but rather the property of object of study lead to this．Contrarily, in the narration of “indeterminancy” have:：we “have to use two kinds of image of wave and particle to describe the same object” (“two kinds” point on the wave and particle, “the same point on the “light”), the here “have to” explained it have no alternative for regard in the same to a series of physical things of not the same of radio wave、infrared wave、light wave、UV wave、UV ray、X-ray、γ-ray、cosmic rays etc, all press in a same noun with “light”．Such treatment be partial to simple certain fuzzy the due boundary, is equal to say, “the different chemical element are all the same image of two kinds of basic particle”, is not become the “multi-image ” theory of contrary with “duality” “theory”?

　　When face two kinds of element of hydrogen and oxygen, whether treat they for two kinds of matter or to emphasize they “only two kinds of the different presentation of basic particle”?

All kinds of electric wave of the frequency under “UV”, from the angle of “wave\particle”, they are the wave only, is the “Transverse fluctuation” of issue in the electron matrix ；UV radiation、X-ray、γray to be the electron’s radiation．Need admit they are the different thing of possess some common point, this is need improvement of optical basic theory, so that make theory press close to reality．

　　“Light” act as a noun, need to reject those electric wave of “non luminance”, let they vest in the noun of “electric wave”．The ray exactly the ray, cannot regard it is not the ray for it can arouse electric wave、appear interference fringe on the matter．

　　As for “electromagnetic wave”, to be the attracting force-line get escape from the waveguide inner or conductor nearby, it not exist the independent “magnetic wave”, in the space electric field and the matter less than atom it does not exist magnetic wave similarly．

　　The starting point of the “duality” theory is good, the result seem reached the aim, but, above analysis appear, its theory cannot justify oneself, the matter of truly fit this theory does not exist, therefore “duality” theory is not correct theory．

　　Need objectively admit, modern physical theory already foist into whole “energy attitude” of the basic particle in the noun of the “light”, if “first impressions are strongest” and want it truthfulness, “light” ought to only use for describe “visible light”, light wave、electric wave、electromagnetic wave and so on noun are all may exist, all kinds of radial are exist objectively in the same, cannot mediate together to them with the “duality”．  

2015-11-13 08:17:00自网上后台

(2015-11-13 09added)： It is to say, “particle theory” and “wave theory”  should be according to their respective suitable object, each use in its proper place, share out the work and cooperate with one another, for "all" photoelectric field. Actually it is, not only  “wave theory” and “particle theory” each sticks to his argument, part company each going his own way, but also crossing the border line to develop, in an attempt to cover each other, thus overwhelmed!itis the actually happening for 200 years they boty cannot “nuified” , come here, for “two theory of wave and particle”, people also intent to be "unified"?