The Wave Equation IS the electron

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the statement "the Wave Equation IS the electron," exploring the relationship between the wave equation in quantum mechanics and the nature of the electron as a particle. Participants engage in a conceptual examination of whether the wave equation can fully describe the dynamics of the electron, touching on aspects of quantum mechanics, particle physics, and the implications of internal structure.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that the wave equation is a mathematical abstraction, while the electron is a physical entity with properties that cannot be reduced to the wave equation alone.
  • Salty proposes that the wave equation describes the dynamics of the electron and suggests that anything exhibiting electron-like behavior could be considered an electron.
  • Daniel challenges this view by arguing that the internal structure of particles like protons affects their dynamics, implying that the wave equation cannot fully account for such complexities.
  • Zz provides counterexamples, stating that wave equations can describe systems involving neutrons and protons, which do not involve electrons, questioning the validity of equating the wave equation with the electron.
  • Another participant highlights the distinction between wavefunctions and quantized fields, suggesting that neither can be equated to the electron, as they serve as tools for description rather than identities.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the relationship between the wave equation and the electron. There is no consensus on whether the wave equation can be said to "be" the electron, as differing opinions on the nature of physical entities and mathematical abstractions persist throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the implications of internal structures of particles and the limitations of the wave equation in describing complex systems. The discussion also touches on the evolution of understanding in particle physics, particularly concerning the nature of fundamental particles.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum mechanics, particle physics, and the philosophical implications of mathematical models in physical theories.

saltydog
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
3
"The Wave Equation IS the electron"

Hello everyone,
I've heard it said that well, "the Wave Equation IS the electron". Can anyone explain this to me? I know what the Wave Equation is (even solved a few of them) and have a degree in Chemistry but I probably would not be able to follow advanced QM dialog.

Thanks,
Salty
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You needn't know too much to tell that
1.The wave equation is an equation,a mathematical object,if u want to,an abstraction.It exists only on paper,in a computer,or in your mind.

2.The electron is a pointlike particle which experinces wave character as well.It has PHYSICAL RELEVANCE,it's not a mathematical abstraction.

Daniel.
 
dextercioby said:
You needn't know too much to tell that
1.The wave equation is an equation,a mathematical object,if u want to,an abstraction.It exists only on paper,in a computer,or in your mind.

2.The electron is a pointlike particle which experinces wave character as well.It has PHYSICAL RELEVANCE,it's not a mathematical abstraction.

Daniel.

Well, this was my rational for the statement:

The wave equation describes the dynamics of the electron. Would QM say that the wave equation "totally describes" the electron? I think so, and tell me if not. But if it does, then the wave equation describes a "dynamics" which exhibits itself in the substrate of "electron". I suggest that the essential property of the electron IS that dynamics independently of what the electron is made up of. My analogy: anything that acts like an electron (exhibiting the same behavior), IS an electron. The dynamics is all that matters and that dynamics is described by the wave equation. Ergo: the wave equation is the electron.

Salty
 
saltydog said:
Well, this was my rational for the statement:

The wave equation describes the dynamics of the electron.


Let's be specific:the time evolution of the quantum state of a SYSTEM is described by the wave equation.The time evolution of the quantum state of an ELECTRON is described by the wave equation FOR THE ELECTRON.

saltydog said:
Would QM say that the wave equation "totally describes" the electron?

The state vector describes the quantum state of the electron.

saltydog said:
But if it does, then the wave equation describes a "dynamics" which exhibits itself in the substrate of "electron".

I wouldn't make that assertion.

saltydog said:
I suggest that the essential property of the electron IS that dynamics independently of what the electron is made up of.

I would contradict you by telling you that an internal structure would affect the dynamics... :wink:

saltydog said:
My analogy: anything that acts like an electron (exhibiting the same behavior), IS an electron.

Yes.

saltydog said:
The dynamics is all that matters and that dynamics is described by the wave equation.

Yes.

saltydog said:
Ergo: the wave equation is the electron.

Salty

Nope.The wave equation for the electron is an equation,a mathematical abstraction.The electron is a particle...

Daniel.
 
Thanks Daniel, I don't remember where I read the statement and will try to track it down for further discussion. My summary was my own effort to explain it. I like your suggestion of how an internal structure might "affect" that idea.

Salty
 
saltydog said:
Well, this was my rational for the statement:

The wave equation describes the dynamics of the electron. Would QM say that the wave equation "totally describes" the electron? I think so, and tell me if not. But if it does, then the wave equation describes a "dynamics" which exhibits itself in the substrate of "electron". I suggest that the essential property of the electron IS that dynamics independently of what the electron is made up of. My analogy: anything that acts like an electron (exhibiting the same behavior), IS an electron. The dynamics is all that matters and that dynamics is described by the wave equation. Ergo: the wave equation is the electron.

Salty

That doesn't make any sense. Next door to my office is a facility called the Intense Pulsed Neutron Source. Physicists describe beams of neutrons using a "wave equation". There are no electrons here!

The same can be said about the proton-antiproton beams in the tevatron at Fermilab.

In each of these, the wave equation can fully describe those two systems. Simply by these examples, I've already proven why what you heard is wrong.

Zz.
 
For a second i really thought you were really assuming that the experimentalists would accelerate wave equations up to speeds close to "c" and then crash them and observe the fraction lines,the derivatives,the operators and the bra/kets coming out of the crashes by using sophisticated detectors... :-p :wink: :-p

Daniel.
 
ZapperZ said:
That doesn't make any sense. Next door to my office is a facility called the Intense Pulsed Neutron Source. Physicists describe beams of neutrons using a "wave equation". There are no electrons here!


Zz.

That's pretty convincing . . .

Thanks,
Salty :blushing:
 
dextercioby said:
I would contradict you by telling you that an internal structure would affect the dynamics... :wink:
What do you mean by "internal structure"? Can you give an example? Is internal structure something physics cannot model, even in principle?
 
  • #10
I didn't say it cannot model.It can model compound particles,but not in an elementary way.
Think of the proton as it was conceived b4 the '60's.Fundamental massive,spin 1/2,electrically charged particle.In principle,its dynamics & properties could be accounted for by the Dirac equation.Was i was simply saying was that,once the proton was discovered to have an internal structure,the Dirac equation and hence the initial dynamics could not account for the physics behind the proton.

Daniel.
 
  • #11
dextercioby said:
I didn't say it cannot model.
I didn't say you did; I was asking. :smile:
 
  • #12
Heh. This thread reminds me of the epic battles I used to have with Alexander, except he'd say that the wavefunction is the electron.

Another argument against this in addition to the ones that have already been presented is that it leaves no room for advances in our knowledge. You say that the wavefunction is the electron? But what about quantum field theory? Now is the electron the quantized field? But a wavefunction and a quantized field are not the same thing, so how can the electron be both?

The obvious answer is that neither the wavefunction nor the quantized field are identical to the electron. They are precise, quantitative conceptual tools that we used to describe electrons. And protons, and neutrons, and pions, Oh My!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K