"If one chooses to believe that the atom really did take a particular path or paths then one has to accept that a future measurement is affecting the atom's past, said Truscott."
Is that equivalent to "reality doesn't exist until it is measured"? Because I don't see the latter claim (which is the headline on HN) anywhere in the text?
Also, didn't Feynman explain in q.e.d. that it's not either a wave or a particle, it's always a particle and the probabilities for the path the particle takes behave like waves? (Something like that, I am foggy on the details).
Is that equivalent to "reality doesn't exist until it is measured"? Because I don't see the latter claim (which is the headline on HN) anywhere in the text?
Also, didn't Feynman explain in q.e.d. that it's not either a wave or a particle, it's always a particle and the probabilities for the path the particle takes behave like waves? (Something like that, I am foggy on the details).