This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
advanced_notions:uncertainty_principle [2018/05/11 16:27] jakobadmin |
advanced_notions:uncertainty_principle [2018/07/26 17:56] (current) 77.177.199.249 [FAQ] |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
We can generate a wave in a long rope by shaking it rhythmically up and down. | We can generate a wave in a long rope by shaking it rhythmically up and down. | ||
- | Now, if someone asks us: "Where precisely is the wave?" we wouldn't have a good answer since the wave is spread out. In contrast, if we get asked: "What's the wavelength of the wave?" we could easily answer this question. | + | {{ :advanced_notions:wave1rope.png?nolink&600 |}} |
- | We can also generate a different kind of wave in a rope by jerking it only once. This way we get a narrow bump that travels down the line. Now, we could easily answer the question: "Where precisely is the wave?" but we would have a hard time answer the question "What's the wavelength of the wave?" since the wave isn't periodic and it is completely unclear how we could assign a wavelength to it. | + | Now, if someone asks us: "Where precisely is the wave?" we wouldn't have a good answer since the wave is spread out. In contrast, if we get asked: "What's the wavelength of the wave?" we could easily answer this question: "It's around 6cm". |
+ | |||
+ | We can also generate a different kind of wave in a rope by jerking it only once. | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{ :advanced_notions:wave2rope.png?nolink&600 |}} | ||
+ | |||
+ | This way we get a narrow bump that travels down the line. Now, we could easily answer the question: "Where precisely is the wave?" but we would have a hard time answer the question "What's the wavelength of the wave?" since the wave isn't periodic and it is completely unclear how we could assign a wavelength to it. | ||
Similarly, we can generate any type of wave between these two edge cases. However, there is always a tradeoff. The more precise the position of the wave is, the less precise its wavelength becomes and vice versa. | Similarly, we can generate any type of wave between these two edge cases. However, there is always a tradeoff. The more precise the position of the wave is, the less precise its wavelength becomes and vice versa. | ||
Line 13: | Line 19: | ||
This is true for any wave phenomena and since in quantum mechanics we describe particle using waves, it also applies here. In quantum mechanics, the wavelength is in a direct relationship to its momentum. The larger the momentum, the smaller the wavelength of the wave that describes the particle. A spread in wavelength, therefore, corresponds to a spread in momentum. As a result, we can derive an uncertainty relation that tells us: | This is true for any wave phenomena and since in quantum mechanics we describe particle using waves, it also applies here. In quantum mechanics, the wavelength is in a direct relationship to its momentum. The larger the momentum, the smaller the wavelength of the wave that describes the particle. A spread in wavelength, therefore, corresponds to a spread in momentum. As a result, we can derive an uncertainty relation that tells us: | ||
- | The more precisely we determine the location of a particle, the less precisely we can determine its momentum and vice versa. | + | The more precisely we determine the location of a particle, the less precisely we can determine its momentum and vice versa. The thing is that a localized wave bump can be thought of as a superposition of dozens of other waves with well-defined wave-lengths((This is exactly the idea behind the [[basic_tools:fourier_transform|Fourier transform]].)): |
+ | |||
+ | {{ :advanced_notions:fourieruncertainty.png?nolink&600 |}} | ||
+ | In this sense, such a localized bump does not have one specific wavelength but is a superposition of many. | ||
---- | ---- | ||
Line 24: | Line 33: | ||
<cite>https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/common-interpretation-of-heisenbergs-uncertainty-principle-is-proven-false/</cite> | <cite>https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/common-interpretation-of-heisenbergs-uncertainty-principle-is-proven-false/</cite> | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <blockquote>Bohr, for his part, explained uncertainty by pointing out that answering certain questions necessitates not answering others. To measure position, we need a stationary measuring object, like a fixed photographic plate. This plate defines a fixed frame of reference. To measure velocity, by contrast, we need an apparatus that allows for some recoil, and hence moveable parts. This experiment requires a movable frame. Testing one therefore means not testing the other. <cite>https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/07/21/nothing-to-see-here-demoting-the-uncertainty-principle/</cite></blockquote> | ||
---- | ---- | ||
Line 58: | Line 69: | ||
\begin{equation} \sigma_A \sigma_B \geq \big | \frac{1}{2i} \langle [A,B] \rangle \big|^2 . \end{equation} | \begin{equation} \sigma_A \sigma_B \geq \big | \frac{1}{2i} \langle [A,B] \rangle \big|^2 . \end{equation} | ||
+ | See also | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [[https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0608138|The certainty principle (review)]] by D. A. Arbatsky | ||
---- | ---- | ||
Line 67: | Line 81: | ||
that can be consistently attributed to it. Indeed, an observable (such | that can be consistently attributed to it. Indeed, an observable (such | ||
as q) that is not invariant under the automorphisms of a state (such | as q) that is not invariant under the automorphisms of a state (such | ||
- | as |jp〉) cannot define an “objective” property of the latter. Hence, | + | as |jp〉) cannot define an “objective” property of the latter. Hence, |
the expectation value function will have a non-zero dispersion. We | the expectation value function will have a non-zero dispersion. We | ||
have argued that this dispersion measures the extent to which the | have argued that this dispersion measures the extent to which the | ||
Line 100: | Line 114: | ||
In some sense, it completely encapsulates what is different about quantum mechanics compared to [[theories:classical_mechanics|classical mechanics]]. | In some sense, it completely encapsulates what is different about quantum mechanics compared to [[theories:classical_mechanics|classical mechanics]]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <blockquote> | ||
+ | A philosopher once said ‘It is necessary for the very existence of science that the same conditions always produce the same results’. Well, they don’t! | ||
+ | |||
+ | - Richard Feynman | ||
+ | </blockquote> | ||
<tabbox FAQ> | <tabbox FAQ> | ||
+ | |||
--> Is there a time-energy uncertainty relation?# | --> Is there a time-energy uncertainty relation?# | ||
Line 150: | Line 172: | ||
<-- | <-- | ||
- | --->What's the origin of the uncertainty? # | + | -->What's the origin of the uncertainty?# |
<blockquote>Quantum mechanics uses the generators of the corresponding symmetry as measurement operators. For instance, this has the consequence that a measurement of momentum is equivalent to the action of the translation generator. (Recall that invariance under translations leads us to conservation of momentum.) The translation generator moves our system a little bit and therefore the location is changed.<cite>Physics from Symmetry by J. Schwichtenberg</cite></blockquote> | <blockquote>Quantum mechanics uses the generators of the corresponding symmetry as measurement operators. For instance, this has the consequence that a measurement of momentum is equivalent to the action of the translation generator. (Recall that invariance under translations leads us to conservation of momentum.) The translation generator moves our system a little bit and therefore the location is changed.<cite>Physics from Symmetry by J. Schwichtenberg</cite></blockquote> | ||
<-- | <-- | ||
- | |||