Hello,(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

I hear a lot about the Born rule ##P = |\psi|^2## where ##P## is a probability of a particle appearing at some location and ##\psi## is a wave function.

When i look at double slit experiment interference pattern it seems to me that the pattern by itself already represents the probability that electron will hit a screen at some location. So if that interference pattern is a superposition of two wave functions i would intuitively say that:

[itex]

\begin{split}

P &= \psi \\

P &= \psi_1 + \psi_2

\end{split}

[/itex]

So to me it is verry bizare that in a Born rule we take absolute value of ##\psi##(why do we do that?)and square it(why do we do it?).

Is there any derivation at all on how they derived or made up the Born rule? Most of posters on other forums allways say it was a lucky guess... I can't bare the mind of that.

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Born rule derivation?

Loading...

Similar Threads - Born rule derivation | Date |
---|---|

A Evaluate this paper on the derivation of the Born rule | May 24, 2017 |

Many-Worlds, Deriving the Born Rule? | Dec 7, 2013 |

I am aware that physicists are trying to derive born rule from unitary evolution | Aug 15, 2012 |

Two Derivations of the Born Rule | Apr 30, 2012 |

Deriving the Born Rule from the operator-centric formulation | Apr 25, 2012 |

**Physics Forums - The Fusion of Science and Community**