edgar-mitchell

Invisible Realities 127
the square of the speed of light. More conundrums arose, however, when
physicists looked closely at how to manage the differences in the other
measurable attributes. These problems resulted in several fundamental
principles and two major paradoxes that still create confusion nearly a
century later.
Two of the principles are those of complementarity and uncertainty. The
complementarity principle states that particle and wave characteristics
are not mutually exclusive, but complementary to each other, in that both
are required to measure basic nature. Complementarity specifies which
attributes of matter may be measured together, and which may not. It
would be like describing apples and pitchforks with the same limited set of
adjectives.
Let’s assume, for example, that apples are primarily measured by their
nutritional content, and pitchforks by the amount of hay they can lift. We
know that apples and pitchforks both have measurable size and weight.
Pitchforks have some of the elements that make up nutrition, but not many.
An apple might lift a few straws of hay, but not many. Therefore, when we
discuss apples, hay-lifting capacity is not fundamental, and when discussing
pitchforks, nutrition is not fundamental. If, instead of particles and
waves, scientists suddenly discovered that beneath the level of our visibility
all nature seemed to be made up of tiny apples and pitchforks, we
would have a problem. Our instruments are calibrated to measure weight,
size, nutritional content, and hay-carrying capacity. The instruments do
not measure apples or pitchforks directly, but only some of their measurable
attributes.
However, the picture we carry in our minds would most likely consist
of tiny versions of the apples and pitchforks we observe in daily life. If, in
an experiment, we detect a little nutritional value, is the instrument detecting
the apple part of nature or a little residual pitchfork Or does it
matter at all except in terms of our visual image of how we think things
really are In this way nutritional content and hay-lifting capacity must be
considered complementary attributes, so long as we are tied to the notion
that apples and pitchforks are what we’re looking for.
The apple and pitchfork example was not chosen haphazardly. Though
particles and waves seem to be a more rational basis for describing the
fundamentals of nature, all such descriptions from the macroscale world
of everyday existence are just keys we have chosen in order to represent
our map of reality. The underlying basis of our existence certainly isn’t
little apples and pitchforks, but little particles and waves may not be the
best description either.
This idea of the complementary appearance of things finds its roots in
the process of knowing, not in the process of what it is that exists. In order