Ask Science
Ask a science question, get a science answer.
Community Rules
Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.
Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.
Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.
Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.
Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.
Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.
Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.
Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.
Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.
Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.
Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Rule 7: Report violations.
Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.
Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.
Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.
Rule 9: Source required for answers.
Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.
By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.
We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.
view the rest of the comments
The difference is that quote is from 20 years before he wrote QED. The book QED explains Quantum Electrodynamics from the standpoint of particles. Quantum Electro Dynamics, which Feynman was fond of reminding everyone was the most thoroughly test theory ever (QED theory matches experiments more so than even General Relativity), is based on treating light as a particle with a probability amplitude.
Whereas there is no way to explain experiments if you assume a photon is a wave because there is no continuous reduction in detection. Observations are ALWAYS discrete.
So on the one hand you can have a theory that treats photons as particles with a probability amplitude, and it explains every observation. On the other hand, you can treat a photon as a wave and then have to handwave away observation by claiming the photon is a wave until observed at which point it instantly transforms into a particle through an unobservable process.
The math works either way, but Occam's Razor is a good principle where when you have two theories and one has extra unobservable processes, the simpler theory is more likely to be the correct theory.