>>>>> I understand that the unaided human eye, under suitable circumstances,
>>>>> can detect a single quantum of light impinging on the retina.
>>>>> That strikes me as being a quantum event perceived without the aid of
>>>>> any machine.

>>>> JE:-
>>>> I don't think that the perception of one photon via the unaided human
>>>> eye (if true) would validly allow the claim that the human eye can
>>>> perceive unaided, one quantum event.

>>> If the mind of that human perceives what his/her eye detected, which is
>>> implied, most others would allow it, and justifiably so.

>> JE:-
>> IMO the detection of one photon by the human eye does not constitute the
>> detection of one quantum _event_. For example, that would require the
>> unaided human eye to be able to perceive one electron moving
>> simultaneously from one quantum level to another. While this may be
>> perceived as a change in the color of the light emitted, the claim that
>> the unaided human eye has actually perceived one QUANTUM CHANGE is not
>> correct. A single quantum change is proposed as instantaneous (they
>> require no time at all) which is way too fast and can only happen with
>> way too small entities for the human eye to be able to perceive them as
>> a bona fide change in matter.

> You choose to DEFINE quantum events as those imperceptible to humans
> without some sort of mechanical assistance.
> I do not.