De Broglie Wavelength: Velocity & Stationary Matter

Harmony
Messages
201
Reaction score
0
1. Since velocity is relative to the reference frame, would the de Broglie Wavelength varies from one observer to another?

2. What will happen if the matter is stationary?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These are incomplete answers, but maybe they'll inspire better ones:

1. Sure, but QM and relativity don't tend to sit well together.
2. Nothing, there is still a random thermal velocity.
 
Harmony said:
1. Since velocity is relative to the reference frame, would the de Broglie Wavelength varies from one observer to another?
If one would apply the principles of special relativity onto QM, YES !

2. What will happen if the matter is stationary?
Stationary with respect to what frame ? :wink:

marlon
 
Harmony,
Special relativity has been totally implied into QM (Previosity: Schroedinger)
through Dirac's and KELIN-GORDON, for fermions and bosons respectively.
Of course, Cesium, this was the case before Dirac's. But, there are still two problems in QM and also in QFT; a. can't deal with Gravity and b. didn't contain GR effects ... There are differences as introduced to me by Amr Morsi.
Got you ... Morsi:wink:
Marlon, this is a very good question, especially when Dirac's, or even Schroedinger (non-relativistic of course), can be applied to dynamic non-conservative fields.

Thanks to permit me to add another question: What is the meaning of De Broglie Wavelength in the view of the newer probability concept of Probability Density Function?


Schwartz Vandslire.

-----------------------------------------------
Either to do it correctly as required, or to leave it as required.
 
Truth Finder said:
What is the meaning of De Broglie Wavelength in the view of the newer probability concept of Probability Density Function?
The de broglie wavelength is a property of a single particle (corresponding to a single energy eigenstate) while a density function describes a group of particles (ie the corresponding wavefunction is a superposition (or tensor product like a Fock space) of single particle wavefunctions which in themselves can contain multiple energy eigenstates if they are non stationary and thus exhibit a spread in their momentum or "deBroglie wavefunction"). So, no straightforeward relation, IMO.

marlon
 
Last edited:
I would like to know the validity of the following criticism of one of Zeilinger's latest papers https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2507.07756 "violation of bell inequality with unentangled photons" The review is by Francis Villatoro, in Spanish, https://francis.naukas.com/2025/07/26/sin-entrelazamiento-no-se-pueden-incumplir-las-desigualdades-de-bell/ I will translate and summarize the criticism as follows: -It is true that a Bell inequality is violated, but not a CHSH inequality. The...
I understand that the world of interpretations of quantum mechanics is very complex, as experimental data hasn't completely falsified the main deterministic interpretations (such as Everett), vs non-deterministc ones, however, I read in online sources that Objective Collapse theories are being increasingly challenged. Does this mean that deterministic interpretations are more likely to be true? I always understood that the "collapse" or "measurement problem" was how we phrased the fact that...
This is not, strictly speaking, a discussion of interpretations per se. We often see discussions based on QM as it was understood during the early days and the famous Einstein-Bohr debates. The problem with this is that things in QM have advanced tremendously since then, and the 'weirdness' that puzzles those attempting to understand QM has changed. I recently came across a synopsis of these advances, allowing those interested in interpretational issues to understand the modern view...
Back
Top