Certainty Gain by Uncertainty Power?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Antonio Lao
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gain Power Uncertainty
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of raising the terms of the Uncertainty Principle to a power, particularly in relation to the concepts of certainty and uncertainty in quantum mechanics. Participants explore theoretical interpretations, mathematical relationships, and the physical significance of these ideas.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that raising both sides of the Uncertainty Principle inequality to a power \( n \) could imply increased certainty, suggesting a direct proportionality between certainty and \( n \).
  • Others argue that decreasing \( n \) may lead to increased uncertainty, presenting a contrasting view on the relationship between power and certainty.
  • A participant introduces the concept of zero point energy and its implications for physical systems, linking it to the broader discussion of uncertainty.
  • Another participant questions the physical meaning of squaring the change in time \( \Delta t \), relating it to spacetime components.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of accurately interpreting Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, noting that it is a consequence of quantum mechanics rather than an empirical generalization.
  • There is a discussion about the determinism of macroscopic phenomena compared to microscopic phenomena, with references to planetary orbits and quantum coherence.
  • Some participants suggest that the products of conjugate variables may be more certain than the variables themselves, drawing parallels to statistical concepts like variance.
  • There are mentions of mathematical principles, such as Fermat's theorem and the area principle, in relation to understanding physical realities.
  • Several participants express confusion or seek clarification on the implications of raising uncertainty to a power and its mathematical significance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion includes multiple competing views regarding the implications of raising the terms of the Uncertainty Principle to a power. There is no consensus on whether this leads to greater certainty or increased uncertainty, and participants express differing interpretations of the mathematical and physical implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the need for careful interpretation of the Uncertainty Principle and its mathematical properties, indicating that misunderstandings can arise from oversimplified views. The discussion also touches on the relationship between quantum mechanics and macroscopic phenomena, suggesting a complex interplay that remains unresolved.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum mechanics, mathematical physics, or anyone exploring the philosophical implications of uncertainty in physical theories.

  • #31
We agree that the number is smaller but can it means also that the uncertainty is lesser? - Antonio

Actually, my point is that the number is only smaller if you choose units in which h<1. But there is nothing profound about choice of units, is there? Units in which h>1 are just as acceptable.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
If your choice of unit is the same as a scale factor then there is big different. Given an area A and a scale factor s, the new area is given by s^2A. If s is smaller (s < 1) the new area is smaller. Bigger s (s > 1), bigger area.

The unit of h is actually angular momentum. So by squaring h we are actually gettting something square of angular momentum. What I want to know is what's the physical meaning of square of angular momentum? Somebody, maybe it was Russell, said that product is the same as addition (integration) if some logarithmic (exponential) function is involved like e^x.
 
Last edited:
  • #33
Antonio,

I don't have any useful thoughts at the moment on the issue of "how would you make a dimensionless number such as the fine structure constant bigger or smaller?" or "what's the physical meaning of square of angular momentum?"

To keep hammering away at my point, how would you critique this discussion between Peter and Paul?

Peter: "The mass of the Earth is really huge. It is 6 x 10^24 kg. When you square that, you get an even bigger number."

Paul: "On the contrary, the mass of the Earth is small. It is only 7 x 10^-7 in units of solar mass. When you square that, you get an even tinier number."

It seems to me that Peter and Paul are both misguided in thinking that the mass of the Earth can be fundamentally classified as either "big" or as "small."
 
  • #34
Janitor,

You got a good point. Yours looks like reasoning behind the relativity of number among fractions and whole numbers.

A physical law with this kind of relativeness is the Law of Universal Gravitation.

F = G \frac{m_1 m_2}{R^2}

and Coulomb law

F = K \frac{q_1 q_2}{R^2}

This gravity force is effective, I think, whenever there is disparity in the mass (m1 >>> m2 , vice versa) or charge.

When m1=m2 such as the structure of a positronium, I cannot understand how the forces of gravity and electricity keep the electron and postiron apart (without crushing into each other)? What is it that keeps them apart? What force?
__________

The other is relativeness of viewing distances. The moon appears the size of my fist when I extend toward it because the fist is much nearer to me than the moon.
 
  • #35
re mod 2

Antonio Lao said:
Thanks. Could you explain further the above?


you wish fo A to be equivalent to -A, presuming you mean in some arithmetical sense, that implies 2A=0, thus you are in a field of characeristic 2, or similar
 
  • #36
matt grime,

Thank you very much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K