seeds wrote: However, I don’t think that Kant would have a problem visualizing how well the word correlates with the hidden (yet verified) underpinning of the objective structures of the universe where the “thing-in-itself” resides in the infinitesimal articulations of information written in the invisible script of quantum waveforms.
I suppose we’re getting a bit off-topic here, but according to Wiki:
And Dictionary.com defines a noumenon as being:Wiki wrote: In metaphysics, the noumenon...is a posited object or event that exists independently of human sense and/or perception. The term noumenon is generally used when contrasted with, or in relation to, the term phenomenon, which refers to anything that can be apprehended by or is an object of the senses. Modern philosophy has generally been skeptical of the possibility of knowledge independent of the senses, and Immanuel Kant gave this point of view its canonical expression: that the noumenal world may exist, but it is completely unknowable through human sensation.
The quantum waves represented in Schrödinger’s mathematical formula...Dictionary.com wrote: 1. the object, itself inaccessible to experience, to which a phenomenon is referred for the basis or cause of its sense content.
2. a thing in itself, as distinguished from a phenomenon or thing as it appears.
3. Kantianism. something that can be the object only of a purely intellectual, nonsensuous intuition.
(and especially in the double slit experiment where the waves are propagating in the interim area that exists between the double slitted wall and that of the screen)
...can only be perceived via the intellect and never directly with the senses.
Indeed, any attempt to view the waving, noumenal-like underpinning of reality only elicits the manifestation of some form of phenomenal presentation of what the sensory inaccessible waves represent.
In other words, we cannot literally see, feel, hear, taste, or smell quantum waves; we can only infer their existence.
And in that way, the quantum bears a resemblance to Kant’s noumenon which, again, is...
_______Dictionary.com wrote: ...something that can be the object only of a purely intellectual, nonsensuous intuition.