A thought on Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

dlinetackle
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Let me first start off by saying that I am somewhat new to physics and it's understanding. But I was looking over the Hiesenberg Uncertainty Princple and a thought occurred to me.

The Heisenberg Unvertainty Principle states "More precisely the position is determined, the less precise the momentum is known at this precise moment." However; if it was possible to measure, not the electron itself, but the electron's interferference on fabric of space-time. The position and momentum would be able to be measured at that precise moment.

So imagine how astronomers detect location and movement of planets light-years away. Apply those same mechanics, but at a much smaller scale and only a few inches away.


I may be way off target, but it may be interesting if someone with a much higher understanding delved into it.

If you would like to contact me, about anything else feel free to email at dlinetackle@yahoo.com I quite frequently delve into stuff that is way over my head.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dlinetackle said:
... I may be way off target ...

Ya think?

Read up a bit more on the HUP before you decide that you've come up with an idea that thousands of well-trained and pretty smart physicists have managed to overlook.
 
dlinetackle said:
However; if it was possible to measure, not the electron itself, but the electron's interferference on fabric of space-time. The position and momentum would be able to be measured at that precise moment.

Welcome to PhysicsForums, dlinetackle!

Your assessment of the Uncertainty Principle above is inaccurate at a number of levels. Generally, particles do not possesses well-defined position and momentum at all times (although there is a little wiggle room on that point, just ask Demystifier). Further, spacetime is distorted by the mass/momentum of a particle, but this distortion could not be determined with sufficient precision to get anything close to what you describe.

As phinds mentions, you should read up on the HUP some more. I would recommend following a few of the many threads on this board on the subject, we tend to discuss it often.
 
@ Drchinese, thanks for the eloquent response. I know I don't know enough about it. Thats why I just tossed it out there to see if I was way off base or not.

@ Phinds Just because thousands of people have tried this or that doesn't mean what I have thought about is any less important. Especially to myself. A number of inventions, theories and even a Law or two have been developed through just meandering with the subject. So I appreciate your response, it however; was inadequate in it's effect.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. Towards the end of the first lecture for the Qiskit Global Summer School 2025, Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, Olivia Lanes (Global Lead, Content and Education IBM) stated... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/quantum-entanglement-is-a-kinematic-fact-not-a-dynamical-effect/ by @RUTA
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
Back
Top