Quantum Stuff.

[colabnumberone-blog]

Integrative Practice: Multiple Worlds (Analytical) - Reflection

Finally, the “multiple worlds” project (#multipleworlds) has concluded following our presentation in class today. For this project, we continued our search for the known within the context of our team made up of Chris Liu, Drake Farmer, Julian de Villers, Nick Jennings and myself. We each played one of five methodological roles. I was assigned the role of “Analytical person”, where from my understanding was to question any flaws, logically criticize, and finally summarize our chosen topic. After some research and discussion, we decided on “Quantum Superposition” a single disciplinary knowledge as our topic that we try to legitimize. From day one, I found it extremely challenging to just stick to my roles as analytical person and not marginalize my disciplinary position. From what I learnt in the previous “integrative practice” project, I understood the purpose of this project was not about succeeding or failing to find a way to legitimize our chosen topic without marginalizing my disciplinary position, but to explore and understand this multi-disciplinary way of thinking.

Even though, I generally don’t enjoy studying any aspect of physics and its boring theories, I did like learning about this (new to me) unique aspect of physics, one that questions everything we thought we knew. Even though, it was very difficult not to wonder off away my analytical role, I try my best to just see our topic from the analytical perspective. While trying to examine our topic, I realised how deep and complicated this topic was. Sometimes, I couldn’t fully understand articles the first time around, so I had to read them multiple times and visualising them to help make sense.

And for our artifact, we decided to do a science experiment type of play. In spite of some challenges, I’m pleased with myself and all our team members, we worked well. We looked at our intra-disciplinary knowledge from inter-disciplinary perspectives. And from our presentation and our blogs, it can be seen that our intra disciplinary topic “Quantum Superposition” is a legitimate knowledge. And that more people should know at least the basics about Quantum mechanics. These theories might not have practical applications today, but it’s almost certain it will eventually become necessary to further our technologies in the new future.

[the-omnari-group]

Interdisciplinary Practical Thinking - Reflection

The interdisciplinary-thinking project has just come to a close, and with that I’m left to reflect on how the whole thing went. Our final artifact, a pseudo-faux-classroom study on Quantum mechanics and superpositioning, involved us actually going out of our way to enlighten the audience about something they otherwise didn’t know, and due to that and the fact that I’m the group’s designated practical thinker (DPT), I’m inherently happy with this outcome. Whether or not the audience actually took anything away from the thing, I have no idea. All I know is that my fellow group-members definitely gained some new knowledge about the subject throughout this project.

And I like to think I helped with that. Since my duty was to bring about new knowledge and ways of thinking, I decided I’d take in some of the methods absorbed through my old high-school teachers and plan out a crash-course lesson. Since this was shortly before our first real group meeting, and thus before we had nailed down a specific field in Quantum mechanics to focus on, this meant I was slowly going through all the bare-bones basics of the science and preparing to add each and every one to the ensuing lesson, so as to cover all the bases and not weight the group’s subsequent decisions. Come the next day, I had grabbed the Colab whiteboard and begun to lead a lesson that, from what I gathered, was actually helpful for the group (and was probably the closest I’ll ever be to being a teacher). I’ll admit that after that meeting, I stepped back and let the rest of the group play out their roles, only stepping in when something needed to be explained. I think that fit my modus operandi pretty well.

This half-carried over to our actual presentation, since by then everyone in the group was up to speed with the actual hard-science facts. Thus, we decided that since the practical thinker is meant to do things and go out of his/her way to generate new understanding, I should be the one setting up all the physical, tangible demonstrations during the presentation, leaving the explaining to the people who were meant to care about the cold facts. Thus, I went and set up (read: made) all the components necessary for a double-slit experiment, which as I had explained to the group previously, was a physical demonstration of wave-particle duality that you can actually see. On the recommendation of the group, I also was tasked with setting up a box that was meant to demonstrate the idea that whatever was inside the box was simultaneously “everything” and “nothing”, since nobody could gain anything about the inside of the box by looking at it alone.

So as I stated previously, I was the designated practical thinker for this group project. I won’t say the thought processes involved were completely alien to me, since I naturally try and explain things to the best of my ability whenever I need to. But despite being something of a pragmatist, I’m not normally one to jump in and just do things in order to understand them. In that sense, I’m more of a theoretical thinker. So being forced to jump in and do some physical work gave me something of a new perspective on how to operate. If I had to take something away from this whole project, I’d say that I’m far more likely to go out of my way to generate understanding in everyday situations now. When the situation calls for it though, naturally.

I’m not one to lie, so I won’t say I thoroughly enjoyed this project 100% of the time, but I’ll admit I had a little fun with it. Always wondered what it’d be like as a schoolteacher, and thanks to this project, I think I’ve got a glimpse. Of something I hopefully will never have to do as a job.

[juliandv-creativetech]

Integrative Practice Reflection (Group 1, qualitative)

Our end artefact was the performance itself, which resulted in a difference delivery as opposed to a purely contextual presentation. Having the qualitative role, I explored the underlying thoughts and ideas. I was the logical candidate for conveying the general idea of each of the two ideas we explored in the performance, being the double slit experiment and Schrodinger’s cat. After which, qualitative explained the formulas, theory explained the wider implications and philosophical meanings, and analytical questioned some of the ideas. All awhile practical conducted the experiments.

I feel this was the best way for us to legitimise the intra-disciplinary topic of quantum superposition. This is a whole new realm of physics, one which questions everything we thought we know about the universe. It has staggering implications which is why it is a discipline which more people should familiarise themselves with, if just the qualitative knowledge. Those who wish to dive deeper can then explore the quantitative knowledge afterwards to understand the reasoning for the qualitative knowledge.

I found the qualitative role challenging as it was hard not to wonder off into other roles. The quantitative side was easy to stay away from, however I think that I crossed a bit into the analytical and theoretical side. Definitely not for the majority of the task, but some of the research component at least. I found that I wanted to put the pieces together and understand them, which is how I related to analytical, and I wanted to research some philosophical takes on quantum superposition, which of course relates to theory.

Furthermore, being the qualitative role during research caused for some strenuous times because the topic at hand was one which relied on quantitative data to provide proof to theories. This meant that there was not as many underlying thoughts or readings published, and those that were contained too much jargon for me to comprehend.

Despite these challenges, I am happy with the outcome and the newly legitimised knowledge. It was an incredibly challenging topic to legitimise and the rabbit hole is infinitely deep. Legitimising an intradiciplinary topic in an interdiciplinary manor was not easy, but neither is quantum superposition.

[colabnumberone-blog]

Why do we seek knowledge? (Qualitative)

Humans seek to understand. With understanding comes control and evolutionary, new ways to survive and thrive.

Epistemology, the theory of knowledge,posterises such questions as:

“What is the nature of knowledge?”

“What are the obstacles to the attainment of knowledge?”

“What can be known?”

“How does knowledge differ from opinion or belief?

(Academy of Ideas, 2012)

Scientists in particular seek to understand the world around us - how things work, and why they work. We obtain knowledge through our senses, however if we only did this we would think such statements as the world is flat, as that is how we more or less see it with the naked eye. Because we cannot always trust our senses it is important to question the knowledge that we hear. After all, our interpretation of knowledge and our entire perception of reality may be completely different to someone else's. This is why different points of views are important while legitimising knowledge, as new knowledge can be discovered in the process. An example of this in quantum mechanics is the Bohr vs Einstein debate, where Einstein did not want to believe Bohr’s quantum theory, or more specifically he was thinking in macroscopic terms, as opposed the the ‘random’ quantum terms. Famously stated he says “God does not throw dice!” The debate was in a way, a motivation for physicists to explore these new topics, helping to legitimise them.

References

Academy of Ideas. (2012, August 30). Introduction to epistemology [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3IcbRNQR4c

Thomsen, D. E. (1986, January 11). As god's dice fall. Science News, pp. 28 - 29.

[hektikcreations]

Reflection

Taking on the theoretical role for this project was relatively difficult for me because I am not too familiar with this discipline. I usually reside closer to the fields of practical and analytical. With that said, I really enjoyed trying to dissect the massive topic Quantum Superposition. I found that throughout the process, I really did dive deeper into the meanings and philosophies behind the practical information provided by my research and as a result of that, I was able to gain a much deeper understanding on the topic. This is an example (although accidental) of cross-disciplinary practice because I was forced to explore the theoretical side of quantum mechanics while my feet were firmly planted with in the realms of the practical research.  The presentation went well, I would have liked a little more time to work on a few more experiments that we could have shown the class. One particular experiment that we didn’t have time to produce involved the superposed antics of dry ice. Kim, from the year 2 mech lab, suggested that we would have to get clearance from AUT security to even bring that stuff into the building. On top of that, it was difficult for us to find a good source of dry ice within Auckland that sells it to civilians.

           Overall, this class as a whole has been something entirely new to me. I struggled with the first assignment because the concept of meta-thinking was completely foreign to me. The second assignment, although outside my comfort zone, was definitely easier for me to get going on it. The meta-thinking mindset is a lot easier for me to get my head around and moving forward, I’ll certainly be able to use this in my future endeavours.  

[colabnumberone-blog]

Theoretical Implications.

Quantum Theory is interdisciplinary in nature. The disciplines are Time, Space,  Matter and Energy. Quantum Theory merely aims to predict how they correlate with one another.

THE DOUBLE SLIT

    Nothing “is” until it is absolutely observed. No statement is more relevant then the previous when describing the double slit experiment. Scientists almost never explain the inner workings of the detector. When dealing with individual particles, it's integral that we know what the detection method is. In theory, it is almost impossible to detect a single particle without disrupting it. We need to know this so we can understand to what degree they are affected. An active detector uses a method similar to bouncing a second ball off of a first ball to figure out where it is. A passive detector looks at the track left behind the first ball as it travels unaffected.

   With the above in mind, one has to ponder if everything and anything is affected simply based on its observation. Take the growth of a plant, for example. It has been proven that plants respond to sound (1), and there is also evidence that they respond to how much attention they receive. Couldn’t it also be equally as possible that the energy we exert while we observe our world through our own two eyes (although un-measurable in the present) is changing our surroundings actively and constantly?

ENTANGLEMENT

   Plainly stated by Professor David Kaiser of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, entanglement is the mirroring relationship between two electrons created together. What happens to one, immediately happens to the other, no matter how far apart they maybe. This is a result of one of two possible theories. Information between the two is transferred faster than the speed of light, or they are still connected... entangled.

   This is a very interesting concept, especially when one thinks of the ‘Big Bang Theory’ in the same light. If everything were once connected like the ‘Big Bang Theory’ states, then shouldn’t all matter be ENTANGLED? This means that all matter in the universe is still technically touching and space is just the construct that gives the illusion that there are separate objects. Shouldn’t any and all occurrences on our planet, solar system, galaxy and universe directly correlate to another mirrored occurrence somewhere else?

References:

1) Stephenson, A. (2008, August 25). Probing Question: Does talking to plants help them grow? | Penn State University. Retrieved October 18, 2015, from http://news.psu.edu/story/141343/2008/08/25/research/probing-question-does-talking-plants-help-them-grow

2) KAISER, D. (2014, November 14). Is Quantum Entanglement Real? Retrieved October 18, 2015, from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/opinion/sunday/is-quantum-entanglement-real.html?_r=0

[colabnumberone-blog]

Our Manifesto

Quantum Superposition

More people should know at least the basics about Quantum mechanics

Nothing “is” until it is absolutely observed.

Matter can act as both a wave and a particle depending on whether or not it is being observed.

The science might not have practical applications today, but will eventually become necessary to further our technology.

The idea behind Quantum entanglement and superposition is one that everyone deals with daily; at its core, it is simply a new way of seeing a fundamental problem.

Although the concepts and alternative methods of thinking can be hard to grasp for most people, they are not something that cannot be taught, and are something that theoretically everyone could grasp with practice.

Scientific methods based upon quantum superpositions have been highly successful in not only increasing our understanding of science but also in bringing greater control and freedom through advances in technology.

Quantum Theory is interdisciplinary in nature. The disciplines are Time, Space,  Matter and Energy. Quantum Theory merely aims to predict how they correlate with one another.

[colabnumberone-blog]

Double Slit (Qualitative)

(Source: P.E.A.C.E.: http://www.peace-files.com/QF-L-11/01_QF-Double-slit.html)

Science communicator, filmmaker and television presenter Derek Muller conducted vox pop interviews to discover what people think of light, and what they think of the double slit experiment.

He asked a couple of questions to random pedestrians:

What’s the difference between blue light and red light?

“it goes in your eyes and you see stuff.”

what is brightness?

“isn’t it an element?”

“light is brightness I guess”

“it makes it not dark”

Although it may have been a bit orchestrated, it really highlights how little the average person knows about these important discoveries. The double slit experiment has profound implications which ultimately may be slowed down by the lack of interest in the area.

3 implications, by the creator of the website HighExistance are:

“1. Matter can act as both a wave and a particle depending on whether or not it is being observed (Wave-Duality Theory)

This is the least meaningful implication for you as a macroscopic organism, but nonetheless it’s a pretty crazy concept.

2. Observation can (possibly) affect the outcome of macroscopic events

After all, you and everything you know are composed of these microscopic particles, so why couldn’t something large be influenced as well? It would be the sum of a seemingly infinite amount of pieces of matter acting as either waves or particles. Scientists have very mixed opinions on this topic so I’ll just say it makes sense to me that this could happen on a larger scale.

3. We don’t know very much about this universe (Science is not yet an ‘exact science’)

There are a couple things out there that science still cannot explain like the characteristics of gravity, but this blows Newton’s discovery out of the water. As we study smaller and smaller particles in order to understand more about what we’re made, we seem to find more things that just don’t make sense. Point being that nothing should be ruled out completely because we simply cannot know anything for certain at this point.”

In 1672 Newton proposed that light is a stream of particles ("Newton's theory of light," n.d.), however in 1678 Dutch physicist Christiaan Huygens believed that light was made up of waves. The double slit experiment proved that they were both in fact correct.

References

Newton's theory of light. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.thestargarden.co.uk/NewtonAndLight.html

Theory of light. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.nightlase.com.au/education/optics/light.htm

[colabnumberone-blog]

Group Meetings - (Analytical)

Wednesday - 14/10/2015 - 10am

We discussed about what we wanted to do for Monday’s presentation. We decided to do a science experiment type of play. And also started a Google doc for our manifesto.

Friday - 16/10/2015 - 10am

We organised our individual roles for the play and planned out what and how we are going to present our work. We decided to do 2 Acts for our presentation. Act 1 being the Schrodinger’s Cat experiment and Act 2 being the double slit experiment.

Qualitative person’s role - Starting + brief introduction.

Quantitative person’s role - Formulate facts using formulas

Practical person’s role - physically construct and demonstrate the experiment.

Theory person’s role - Explaining the meta meanings and principles.

Analytical person’s role - Question any flaws, logically criticize , and summarize the experiment.

Sunday - 18/10/2015 - 3pm

We practised our presentation and finished our manifesto. 

[colabnumberone-blog]

(Analytical) - Double Slit Experiment seems very sloppy to me.

From what I understand, the double slit experiment investigates into the properties of particles and the concepts of quantum superposition. What actually occurs is that each electron from this laser not only goes through both slits, but also at the same time traverses every possible trajectory via route to the target.

This is the one experiment that every quantum scientist swears upon as proof of the “Quantum Superposition” theory. But I still can’t get my head around this weird experiment fully. Doesn't the fact that the behaviour of electrons when shot through a double slit, alters from wave-like patterns to particle patterns, and the act of “observing” and not “measuring” challenge its initial purpose? How can you observe the behaviour of these particles at the quantum level, and by what means? This experiment is often described as having different outcomes when someone observes the electrons passing through the slits in this experiment. But no human can observe an electron with their naked eye. A fundamental distinction seems to have been ignored in deriving the conclusion that just by observing the electrons in this experiment alters the experiment’s outcome, which to me seem very sloppy.

References:

Gonuguntla, S. (2013). Explaining the double slit experiment. Retrieved from

http://debunkingrelativity.com/2013/12/08/explaining-the-double-slit-experiment/

Francis, M.(2011). What does the new double slit experiment actually show. Retrieved from http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/what-does-the-new-double-slit-experiment-actually-show/

[colabnumberone-blog]

SCHRÖDINGER'S CAT EXPLAINED

[colabnumberone-blog]

Chris talking about the practical side of Schrödinger's Cat.

[colabnumberone-blog]

(Analytical) - I find the famous Schrodinger's Cat experiment is flawed.

After carefully analysing, I find the famous Schrodinger's Cat experiment is flawed and does not work.

If you don't know what this thought-experiment entails, a brief description won't help, but here is some history anyway:

It was actually Einstein's idea. Einstein had deep problems with Quantum Mechanics, even though he helped start the field with his non-relativity papers. Quantum Mechanics was championed by Heisenberg, who is famous for his Uncertainty Principle. Heisenberg realized that the more precisely you determined a subatomic particle's Position, the less able you were to determine its momentum.

This isn't just a limitation of our experimental apparatus, this is really how the subatomic world behaves. Bell's theorem cinched this in the 50's when he found that particles which were separated by a great distance somehow "communicated" to one another. If you entangled these particles (so that they have similar properties like spin), measuring one particles would suddenly limit what you could measure from the other particle. This is 100% real. Lab-tested and guaranteed.

Einstein had big problems with this. After all, he was the guy that set up the speed limit signs all over the universe. Nothing could travel faster than the speed of light, not even information. So he was always coming up with thought-experiments to challenge Quantum Mechanics, and Bohr and Heisenberg were always debunking them. Schrodinger's Cat is one of those thought-experiments that Bohr and Heisenberg never debunked because they actually agreed with the results.

So Einstein wrote Schrodinger, another critic of QM, and said that he could build a bomb that was set off by radioactive decay, and the bomb would both go off and not go off. Schrodinger toyed with this idea and came up with his famous experiment:

In a box you have a Geiger-Counter which is reading the decay of some radioactive material. When the Geiger-Counter hits a certain reading, a hammer smashes a vial which releases a poison which kills a cat.

According to this experiment, until you open the box, the cat is both dead and alive. The probability function spreads out over both of these possibilities, and it isn't until you open the box that you find the cat in one or another of these states.

Now, if you don't really know what Quantum Mechanics is all about, you will reject this out-of-hand. But this experiment has really troubled physicists for 70 years because this seems to be how nature works. Bohr and Heisenberg agreed with this conclusion.

 And they were all wrong!!!

 The problem with the thought experiment is quite simple, Schrodinger was confusing "observing" and "measuring". It is not when humans observe a measurement that the wave function collapses, it is when we take the measurement. By putting the Geiger-Counter in the box, they included a measuring device even worse, Schrodinger included an observer, the cat. But even Einstein's bomb would either go off or not, as soon as the Geinger-Counter made its measurement!

And this happens every day. Scientists set up experiments, complete with the recording devices which scratch out results on reams of paper. It might be hours or even days before any human looks at the results of these experiments, and nobody thinks that this is the moment when the results are solidified. They were determined when they were measured, not when the measurement was observed.

Problem solved. I'm sure Bohr would have found this flaw, except he didn't want to. It conformed to his prejudices so he never examined it.

From this what I understand is that Scrodinger’s Cat represents the unknown. And this experiment also illustrates the interpretation flaws of quantum mechanics, which states that a particle exists in all states at once until observed. It also suggests the radioactive materials can decay and not decay in a sealed environment, and in this case the cat is both alive and dead until the box is opened.

References:

Rusbult, C. (2007). Common sense about Schrodinger’s Cat and Quantum Physics. Retrieved from

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/qm-cr.htm

Halpen, P. (2015). Albert is an old fool: Einstein vs Schrodinger. Retrieved from

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/18/albert_is_an_old_fool_einstein_vs_schrodinger_in_battle_of_the_nobel_laureates/

Law, T. (1999). Will curiosity kill Schrodinger’s cat?. Retrieved from 

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/will-curiosity-kill-schrodingers-cat/145454.article

[colabnumberone-blog]

Quantum Mechanics and Superpositions - Practical

Quantum mechanics is something that most average people just carefully ignore, knowing that they’d be in over their head after the first sentence of any related article. Naturally, it’s also quite a challenge to boil everything down to a level the average joe will actually understand. Being the one who “brings about new understanding”, I had to take something like the wikipedia article for Quantum Superpositions and re-word it in a way that absolutely anyone and everyone could understand, more out of contingency than anything else. The easiest way to do that with minimal abstraction and/or setup was through a pseudo-classroom situation, whiteboards and all.

That classroom atmosphere also came as a result of a decision I made about my modus operandi for my role. I figured that I wasn’t there to provide opinion or direction - I was just there to make sure everyone knew what was happening and had a basic understanding that was simultaneously comprehensive enough to make bold decisions about the project. I noticed the similarity of this standpoint to that of the “classical” schoolteacher and ran with the idea.

The hardest part, however, was learning about the subject myself without any outside help. Once again, since I was the one that was meant to explain everything, I realized that I needed to have a comprehensive understanding about what I was talking about so that I wouldn’t end up misleading anyone else. This meant a couple long nights studying crash courses, and eventually led to planning out simplified explanations as I read. I believe the effort paid off though, if the previous group session was anything to go by.

[colabnumberone-blog]

Multiple Worlds – Daring Integrations of Disciplinary Legitimacy.

For this assignment, we continue the search for the known within the context of our team made up of Chris Liu, Drake Farmer, Julian de Villers, Nick Jennings and Niishahn Taan. We each will be playing one of five methological roles.

 • Qualitative – explore underlying thoughts, opinions and motives

• Quantitative – employs measurable data to formulate facts

• Practical – actively does things to generate new understanding

• Theory – reflects on meta meanings to develop philosophical principles

• Analytical – analyses the relationship of parts to affectively organize them

 Our challenge was to find a truly multi-disciplinary way of legitimizing knowledge without marginalizing disciplinary positions.

After much research and discussion among our group, we have decided on working with  “Quantum – Superposition” a single discipline knowledge as our subject, and we will try to legitimize our intra-disciplinary subject’s knowledge.

[colabnumberone-blog]

Quantum Mechanics for Dummies

Reference:

LondonCityGirl, (2015, 14 May). Quantum Mechanics for Dummies. Retrived from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JP9KP-fwFhk

[colabnumberone-blog]

Quantum Mechanics - Quantitate

Looking at the hard numbers and facts surrounding Quantum Mechanics, is quite a daunting task. Most of the formula’s look like some alien language to the untrained eye, and require a deep level of unpacking to get a grasp on what is being said. 

Looking at 2 specific parts of Quantum Mechanics; Super Positions (specificly Schrodinger's Cat) and The Double Slit experiment. 

A major part of Quantum Physics is the ability for matter to be in multiple states until observed. As in the EPR Article (1935), matter such as atoms and photons can be in different states until they are observed absolutely. These are called ‘Super Positions’

10

01

You have an equal 50% chance of it being 10 or 01. These are the only possible outcomes. You can only look at each number one at a time. If you look at the first digit you define what the second number is. If you reveal ‘1’ then you know for sure that the second digit is a 0, But, before revealing the 1, both digits are 1 and 0 at the same time.

Below is the Equation for Schrodinger’ Cat;

Schrodinger’s Cat has been labeled as the greatest explanation for Quantum Mechanics and Superpositions. The experiment itself relies on the probability that a small amount of radioactive material will either decay or emit an alpha particle, for the experiment both of these have an equal  chance. If an alpha particle is emitted the cat dies. If the material decays, the cat lives but, you cannot gather any information from the box until it is opened. 

| Cat > = ( 1/√2) | Live > + ( 1/√2) | Dead >

Cats = (1/2) Live + (1/2) Dead.

Opening the box at time T, there is a 50% probability that there has been an alpha particle emission. If you open the box earlier T/2  there is only a 25% chance that there has been an emission. and at 2T there is a 25% chance of there being no emission.

But, until you open the box, and absolutely observe the outcome of the experiment at whatever time you open the box, the cat is both Alive and Dead.

For the Double Slit Experiment, we can look at this as a basic DIY quantum physics experiment that you can do at home. You take a laser and an opaque object blocking the beam of light, you then cut two parallel slits within 1-4mm apart (so the beam of light passes through both slits simultaneously).  

When you pass the light through the two slits, we get an interference pattern, similar to wavelengths passing though two slits. But, seeing as we are firing photons (particles of light) you would expect them to pass through in two straight lines. This shows that photons can have both characteristics of waves and particles. When you fire an individual photon at the double slit, and absolutely observe where it is going, it acts like a particle. When you absolutely observe where the light goes after the slits, you observe a wavelength interference pattern. 

Up until 2012 when we had only observed light in either particle or wave form, and it is only recently we have been able to observe photons having both wave and particle qualities when observed in a new experiment. (Photonics.com, 2015)

References:

Kramer, M. (2013). The Physics Behind Schrödinger's Cat Paradox. [online] News.nationalgeographic.com. Available at: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/08/130812-physics-schrodinger-erwin-google-doodle-cat-paradox-science/ [Accessed 12 Oct. 2015].

WhatIs.com, (2015). What is superposition? - Definition from WhatIs.com. [online] Available at: http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/superposition [Accessed 12 Oct. 2015].

MIT Technology Review, (2009). How to Create Quantum Superpositions of Living Things | MIT Technology Review. [online] Available at: http://www.technologyreview.com/view/415286/how-to-create-quantum-superpositions-of-living-things/ [Accessed 12 Oct. 2015].

Photonics.com, (2015). Photons Observed as Particles, Waves Simultaneously. [online] Available at: http://www.photonics.com/Article.aspx?AID=52250 [Accessed 17 Oct. 2015].