Register to reply 
Stillness of Systems 
Share this thread: 
#1
Mar212, 08:18 PM

PF Gold
P: 795

Hi there,
I'm not sure if I read somewhere  but if we see a system (macroscopic usually) and it looks still, is it actually not still? Is there a universal equation that governs how 'still' an object is? In the doubleslit experiment, if we have the slits not being still, because we're calculating the paths possible for the system to reach point B as if the slits are in a certain position  they're 'moving'  can we safely ignore any stillness issues in any Physics equation without affecting the accuracy of the Physics equations? 


#2
Oct1713, 09:31 PM

PF Gold
P: 795

This question dates back quite a while, but am interested in knowing the answer.



#3
Oct1813, 03:23 AM

P: 3,089

Perhaps have a think about the implications of the Uncertainty principle. Prevents you knowing both the position and momentum at the same time. If the momentum is known (for example velocity = 0) then the position is unknown.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle I'm not sure what the OP means by "safely ignore". Clearly this is a small scale effect that can be ignored in many situations. 


#4
Oct1813, 08:23 PM

P: 1,072

Stillness of Systems
The math for the double slit assumes infinitely thin perfect absorbers with perfect boundaries and interference free paths. To the extent that is not true, the results are distorted. The inherent vibration or uncertainty of the molecules at the boundaries and the resulting "nonideal" interaction with the particle could be modeled. (but not by me)
So, stillness is but one of many factors that can effect experiments. I don't know of any universal treatment of stillness since it could be caused by uncertainty, vibration due to air currents, gravitational effects due to anything, or whatever. 


#5
Oct1813, 09:32 PM

PF Gold
P: 795




#6
Oct1913, 12:53 AM

P: 1,072

What do you mean by what do you mean by? (lol)
I think I know what you are asking, but I'm not sure how far I can take it. I'm just saying that the simplistic math assumes the slits and barriers are ideal. There is no reflection from internal surfaces of a thick barrier, that the boundaries are not jagged, and when the barrier is contacted it results in perfect absorbtion (and none if not contacted). In determining the area of the slit there are no angle of approach issues caused by barrier thickness. I think I should have added that the particle is dimensionless. After all, the path integral assumes the particle takes all possible paths and a thick barrier has effects on the possible paths. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
Interested in Chaos Theory, Complex Systems, Nonlinear Systems  Academic Guidance  8  
Absolute Stillness?  Quantum Physics  6  
MultiStep linear systems problem  Build ODE, impulse response, systems balance  Calculus & Beyond Homework  12  
Something i thought of involving hamiltonian systems and gradient systems  Differential Equations  0  
Signals and Systems: Response of LTI systems to Complex Exponentials  Electrical Engineering  1 