A number of experiments confirmed the dualistic wave-particle nature of matter. In 1927, the Davisson–Germer experiment confirmed the de Broglie hypothesis of wave-particle dual nature of matter. The Tanomura double-slit experiment demonstrates the dualistic character of matter as well (Greenstein and Zajong 1997, 5). Recently, Olaf Nairz et al. (2002) repeated the double slit-experiment on a C60 molecule, indicating the validity of this dualistic nature at any size of matter. As mentioned above, the dualistic wave-particle character of matter is a great puzzle. Instead of struggling to find an external model for this dualistic nature, perhaps we should dwell into the act of perception itself.
I mentioned earlier that the act of dividing and quantifying is a function of the left brain. In 1926, Max Born maintained that since the wave portion cannot be observed, it is not a real entity in classical terms. However, he asserted that we probably can find a classically recognizable particle in a region designated by the square of the wave function. One can suppose that if the particle portion is merely an approximation modeled by our left hemisphere, then it is understandable that our brain would project it to the region where the energy is most concentrated. As mentioned above, in quantum mechanics, objects exist simultaneously in a “superposition” of different schemes and scenarios. For example, in wave-particle duality, the particle-like behavior is most evident when the experimenter measures the particle characteristics of it. In other words, when we look for particle characteristics of matter, we see a particle. When an observer measures the phenomenon, the wave-function will randomly "collapse" to a specific particle at some specific location. Even though the sense organs (eyes) are stimulated by waves (optical band), all we sense is a solid matter. It therefore seems fair to speculate whether the particle portion of matter is a construct of the left hemisphere.
The nineteenth-century post-modernist Edmund Husserl, like Jean-Paul Sartre and many other post-modernist philosophers, believed that mental objects have nothing to do with sensory perception and result instead from what the mind attends to, or intends.
Likewise, Friedrich Nietzsche claims, “All truths are evolving fictions that exist only in the subjective reality of single individual” (Kafatos and Nadeau 1999, 159–160).
Above, I claimed that our five senses are stimulated mostly by waves. But is the world made just from waves? It is quite probable that waves are the main building blocks of actual reality. Wave mechanics is a complete theory, which provides a complete description of a quantum system. However, it describes only the probability of events happening, as opposed to definite events or states.
At least one physicist proposes that the wave-particle duality can be replaced by a "wave-only" view. Carver Mead (2000) analyzes the behavior of electrons and photons purely in terms of electron wave functions. Mead has cut the Gordian knot of quantum complementarity, in which particles alternatively demonstrate particle-like or wave-like properties. He claims that atoms, with their neutrons, protons, and electrons, are not particles at all but pure waves of matter. Mead refers to the evidence of the exclusively wave nature of both light and matter, obtained between 1933 and 1996. He assesses examples of pure-wave phenomena, such as the ubiquitous lasers of CD players, the self-propagating electrical currents of superconductors, and the Bose–Einstein condensate of atoms (Wikipedia, “Interference (Wave Propagation),” 2010).
As mentioned above, quantum mechanics describes the world in a superposition of all possible states. Although this is very difficult to comprehend, challenging one’s conventional wisdom, every related experiment proves the validity of this postulate. But we see the world in just one state. The puzzle of how we come to perceive one state (as seen at the classical level) out of the superposition of states (the simultaneous existence of all possible schemes and states, as predicted by quantum mechanics) is mind boggling. The bizarre antagonism between the classical and quantum mechanical aspects of reality is the question of the century.
The way in which the two hemispheres operate closely resembles the two modes of reality described above. While one hemisphere displays an imaginative, intuitive, random, and chaotic scheme, as predicted by quantum mechanics, the other one describes a concrete, detailed, and definite picture, similar to the classical world that we are familiar with.
The left hemisphere’s perception is descriptive, based on the past experiences of the individual. Data received by the left brain is manipulated and altered and does not necessarily reflect the true nature of the information received. The left hemisphere’s view is just an interpretation or an approximation of the incoming data. Therefore, the concrete and logical classical level may be partly a construct of our left brain. While this classical perception is very useful to us on a daily basis, keeping us from sinking into insanity, its accuracy at describing what’s really out there is a matter of debate.