B Energy-time uncertainty relation for a volume and macroscopic objects?

Click For Summary
The energy-time uncertainty relation, expressed as ΔE Δt ≥ ħ/2, indicates a trade-off between the precision of energy and time measurements, with time not being an observable in quantum mechanics. The discussion explores the possibility of applying this relation to a volume of space, suggesting that the time interval can be linked to a spatial length divided by the speed of light. However, it is clarified that Δt in this context does not represent a standard deviation of time measurements but rather the duration for significant changes in the system. The application of this relation to macroscopic objects is questioned, as it diverges from the foundational principles of quantum mechanics. Overall, the energy-time uncertainty relation remains a nuanced topic with specific constraints in its application.
Aidyan
Messages
182
Reaction score
14
As I understand it, the energy-time uncertainty relation \triangle E \triangle t \geq \hbar /2 expresses a trade-off between the precision with which energy and time can be simultaneously measured. I understand that, unlike position and momentum, time is not an operator, so the relation is not a formal uncertainty between two observables. Instead, it reflects the idea that the shorter the duration \triangle t over which a quantum state exists, the more uncertain is its energy \triangle E. For example, it underlies the phenomenon of the broadening of spectral lines.
I'm wondering whether it can be applied to a volume of space, where the time interval is related to a length L divided to the speed of light c as: \triangle t=\frac{L}{c}. Then \triangle E \geq \frac{\hbar}{2 \triangle t}=\frac{\hbar c}{2 L}=\frac{\hbar c}{2 V^{1/3}}. If so, can this be applied to macroscopic objects occupying a volume V? Does this make sense? If not, why not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Aidyan said:
As I understand it, the energy-time uncertainty relation \triangle E \triangle t \geq \hbar /2 expresses a trade-off between the precision with which energy and time can be simultaneously measured.
It's nothing like that. Time is not an observable in QM; it's an independent variable, unrelated to the particle itself (unlike the position of the particle). In any case, Griffiths deals with this common misunderstanding in his Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. See section 3.5.3:

##\Delta t## in the energy-time uncertainty principle is not the standard deviation of a collection of time measurements. Roughly speaking, it's the time it takes the system to change substantially.

He then goes on to make this more precise.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta Prime
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...