Since light exhibits a wave-particle duality, does that make light 2 items or 1

Light seems to qualify in the general assertion that nothing is entirely anything while everything is partly something else. It seems to have some of the qualities of a particle and some of a wave but I'm not even sure whether, as you word it, your q has meaning

Good answer !
As a historical footnote, Isaac Newton was obliged to conceal his contempt for "the Christian Trinity" in order to protect his tenure at Trinity College, Cambridge.

u dont get it, bc u refuse to admit that everything u know is out of knowledge abuse, which also u mean doing by knowing anything confirmin evil being life

light is one thing, but any absolute is positively smthg objective and negatively never any else, so a thing is then hundred percent itself
bc thing is freedom the only existin objective reality, the matter superiority justifyin its constancy being a matter of fact

that is what attractions mean, where it is the same, but showin how the true same is the free move not the move end, so freedom entity
makin an opposite movin to its destructions convinced that it can stay free

I love the term wavicle.

Im, forgive me, no offense, but there seems to be a language barrier and wonder if you might find someone to translate for the benefit of, say, the Average Clod (me)

no offense but there is nothing meant of what i said but to prove u inventin things that do not exist, showin how what i invent without making sense look much more sensible then ur inventions about anything

So now you know !

two
Joe(But I am not telling Imans why.)Nation

Alas Fres, I'm sure Ig is most intelligent and far more profound than you or I--at least I--and so I'm not even sure I'd understand a translation; but at least I'd have a basis for that determination

Again Ig I apologize for what must seem excess criticism but you surely have colleagues who could help us

Yes JL, we've wandered a bit OT haven't we

Have wondered, the uncertainty of the photon's path is Her way to prevent us from establishing Her "creation" as a deterministic process

who is her morons, go to hell u and her in all hims and other hers

a creator by definition stupid know that all is according to his exclusive moves and wills, which prove that there is no creator since of course all is determined

and when all is determined then any especially up mean their freedom from all always, morons u r by urselves till u die

Well okay, just this one time, Im, its being Sunday and all

I presume I'm being called a moron for assigning to God a sex

Again I presume that's me

Yes Im, I think I almost follow you at this point. You're saying there can't be a "Creator" (and by the same token we can't freewill) because She wouldn't endorse any such hopeless, meaningless Megillah

I interpret this to mean that if there is a God after all that She doesn't confer freedom till you reach heaven, that all the rest of us morons down here nevertheless lead that deterministic, inexorably inevitable existence

So Im how did I do

defintely u all ways, it must b printed as genes

from any u see its end at u, then u conclude that there is no any but ur wills

in truth, from any there is only that relative thing out of any, which relative thing perceived by its relative reaction sense as being smthg else there

when truth exist since existence is true, then any is the smallest superior relative true, till any is truly being so truth freedom would b living
when life is true then any would become free living, this in concept is right

when it is the reverse sense in all ways and facts then obviously any is never relative and all is one evil life, which is the her u mean which is worse then him but also him worse then her

It is not only light that has this duality but massive particles such as electrons as well. Everything in other words exhibits wave and particle behaviors but the two aspects cannot ever be simultaneously observed. Whatever is really there either morphs from particle to wave depending on the type of measurement preformed or maybe a better way to think about it is that our concepts of wave and particle are only approximations of what is really there.

haha...

I will give you a guess, a guided particle. Guided by a pilot wave.

Now, lets cut the layman bullshit and dive deeper on the actual problem at hand which is about randomness or determinism...I won't lie I am biased towards determinism because randomness is one of those obscure concepts that in my mind just makes no sense whatsoever...at best we have what mathematicians call pseudo-randomness, check on that on youtube...to the point an interesting video about Laplace's Demon!
(Skip the first minutes with bad sound up to the start of the lecture)