http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor#Science_and_the_scientific_method

"In science, Occam's Razor is used as a heuristic (rule of thumb) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models.[8][9] In physics, parsimony was an important heuristic in the formulation of special relativity by Albert Einstein,[36][37] the development and application of the principle of least action by Pierre Louis Maupertuis and Leonhard Euler,[38] and the development of quantum mechanics by Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg and Louis de Broglie.[9][39] In chemistry, Occam's Razor is often an important heuristic when developing a model of a reaction mechanism.[40][41]"

You are pointing the finger and saying I am ignorant yet you dismiss Occams razor in ignorance of its application to the scientific method. According to the principle of parsimony I do have an argument but it appears you can't be bothered to consider what I am saying. This is an intellectual laziness which seems to typify our culture today. It is an apathetic reasoning process that sees everything through the lens of stereotypes and generalities. If I am wrong about that I will happily admit it, and you still have ample opportunity to establish otherwise.

There are many models which have their own proofs. Without wave-particle duality, there would be not electron microscopes. One definition of a wave is the probability of a particle being at a certain time t. This is one topic where Einstein disagrees with de Broglie, who also disagrees with Feynman, and so on, hence the Copenhagen interpretation. They all agree on the differential equations behind the wave-particle model, but their interpretations of the equations are all in violent disagreement. Great topic though

>> ^offsetSammy:

According to Feynman's QED, there's no such thing as "wave-particle duality", it's just all particles. The behavior of the particles, however, is very strange, and that's what accounts for their wave-like characteristics. QED came after Dirac and Schrodinger (it was a refinement of their theories), so I'm not sure why it doesn't get acknowledged in these kinds of discussions.
QED also predicts exactly the results of things like the double slit experiment without ever resorting to the "well the wave collapses into a particle when we observer it" kind of thing.

Your video, Sixty Symbols - de Broglie Waves, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Well, de Broglie couldn't get past the fact that in Quantum mechanics, the wave-particle behaves differently if there is an observer. Schrodinger's cat confused a lot of physicists, but it was there to prove a point. When people conducted the double-slit experiment, they confirmed Schrodinger's theory, de Broglie's wave theory, and Heisenberg's theory. Here's the cartoon version of the double-slit diffraction experiment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc&feature=related

What the Bleep... is mostly a movie based around pseudo science and new age Ramtha philosophy. One must be careful about what you believe from this.

Quantum mechanics deals with small systems, and quantum effects (especially Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) are applicable only to matter on the scale of the de Broglie Wavelength. The movie exploits these effects by falsely implying that theses same effects (especially a wavefunction associated with an object and probability calculations concerning this object) are applicable to everyday objects, e.g. basketballs, humans, or fountains. This is simply not the case.

As the purported experts speak throughout the movie, they make several references to concepts, ideas, and alleged facts about quantum physics and other specific items. However, few of the scientists involved are actually professional physicists doing research in quantum mechanics, and one of those that does do such research, David Albert, has complained that his views were deliberately misrepresented.

The movie also fails to explain precisely how the theory of quantum mechanics actually proves any of the mystical or religious teachings found in the film. Statements from physicists are made which are then intercut with statements from medical doctors, people who have created their own religion, and others. No logical argument connecting the findings of quantum mechanics with the movie's core message is offered.

There is one singular argument that completely takes this proposed notion apart:

Quantum mechanics deals with small systems, and quantum effects (especially Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) are applicable only to matter on the scale of the de Broglie Wavelength. The movie exploits these effects by falsely implying that theses same effects (especially a wavefunction associated with an object and probability calculations concerning this object) are applicable to everyday objects, e.g. basketballs, humans, or fountains. This is simply not the case.

What the Bleep... is mostly a movie based around pseudo science and new age Ramtha philosophy. One must be careful about what you believe from this.