Exclusion principles for fermions and bosons

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brandon1994
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bosons Fermions
Brandon1994
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello,
I was curious about how the exclusion principle applied to fermions and bosons differently. My current understanding is that the exclusion principle states that no two fermions may be in the same state of motion and that bosons do not obey the exclusion principle. My problem with this is can't two electrons (identical fermions) be in the same state of motion? I know that no two electrons may be described by the same four quantum numbers in the same atom, however, isn't it possible for two electrons in different atoms ( or for the sake of argument two free electrons ) to be in the same state of motion? How does this not violate the exclusion principle?


~thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They cannot be identical in all quantum numbers. They can have the same spatial wave function ("state of motion"?), if their spin is different, for example.

Electrons are identical - if you consider two atoms, you cannot say "this electron is at atom A and that electron is at atom B". The eigenstates are always combinations of "orbital at atom A" + "orbital at atom B" (plus some modification if the atoms are close to each other), and both electrons will be in different eigenstates.
 
Im not that up on quantum theory ( I am starting college as a physics major and have only completed ap level high school physics and single variable calculus ) but if I understand correctly, you are saying that two electrons are in different states of motion due to the fact that they are in different orbitals? (Im guessing the eigenstate function involves the orbital)
 
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Back
Top