Experimental confirmation of the Born rule

In summary: I was just curious if the results of the "photoionisation microscope" would count as evidence in support of the Born rule.Agreed.
  • #1
Dadface
2,489
105
If we assume that a particle can be detected at a particular location, how can we do the detecting?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
  • #3
BvU said:
With a suitable particle detector :smile:

What is your real question ?
Specifically, how would you attempt to detect an electron, at a particular location whilst in the bound state of the hydrogen atom.
The particle detector you referred to is no good at the moment. It needs re calibrating.
 
  • #4
Dadface said:
how would you attempt to detect an electron, at a particular location whilst in the bound state of the hydrogen atom

By shooting photons at the atom of short enough wavelength to resolve positions to the required accuracy (much less than a Bohr radius). Which would, of course, ionize the atom (with enough kinetic energy left over for the electron to make it relativistic, if my quick back of the envelope estimate is correct), so the result of your position measurement on the electron would be useless in practical terms, but it would satisfy the requirement you have stated.
 
  • Like
Likes Dadface and vanhees71
  • #5
PeterDonis said:
By shooting photons at the atom of short enough wavelength to resolve positions to the required accuracy (much less than a Bohr radius). Which would, of course, ionize the atom (with enough kinetic energy left over for the electron to make it relativistic, if my quick back of the envelope estimate is correct), so the result of your position measurement on the electron would be useless in practical terms, but it would satisfy the requirement you have stated.

Thank you.

I found a report from 2013 which summarised the work of a team who used the "photoionisation microscope" to observe some nodal structures of the hydrogen atom. The graphical results displayed seemed to show some agreement between experiment and theory.

I'm mainly interested to know if there are results which give backing to The Born rule. I will try to get access to the original paper I referred to and any more up to date papers.
 
  • #7
Dadface said:
I'm mainly interested to know if there are results which give backing to The Born rule.

Doesn't any experimental result that shows probabilities equal to the squared moduli of the corresponding amplitudes support the Born rule? Which means, all of them?
 
  • #9
PeterDonis said:
Doesn't any experimental result that shows probabilities equal to the squared moduli of the corresponding amplitudes support the Born rule? Which means, all of them?
Yes. It's details of the latest experiments I'm looking for.
 
  • #10
Dadface said:
used the "photoionisation microscope" to observe some nodal structures of the hydrogen atom

It should be noted that this "observation" is destructive: the process of "observing" ionizes the atom and thereby destroys the structure that was being observed. So this is not the same as what one would intuitively think of as "observing" an atom, i.e., looking at it without changing it.
 
  • #11
PeterDonis said:
It should be noted that this "observation" is destructive: the process of "observing" ionizes the atom and thereby destroys the structure that was being observed. So this is not the same as what one would intuitively think of as "observing" an atom, i.e., looking at it without changing it.
Yes, but how else can we look at the atom without changing it?
 
  • #12
Dadface said:
how else can we look at the atom without changing it?

You can't. But the language scientists often use to describe these experiments to lay people can easily mislead people into thinking that you can. That's why I think it's important to be clear about what is actually going on. What scientists call "looking at an atom" actually means "making destructive measurements on a lot of atoms that were all prepared the same way, and using the measurement results to make a picture".
 
  • Like
Likes BvU and vanhees71
  • #13
PeterDonis said:
You can't. But the language scientists often use to describe these experiments to lay people can easily mislead people into thinking that you can. That's why I think it's important to be clear about what is actually going on. What scientists call "looking at an atom" actually means "making destructive measurements on a lot of atoms that were all prepared the same way, and using the measurement results to make a picture".
Agreed.
 

1. What is the Born rule and why is it important in science?

The Born rule is a fundamental principle in quantum mechanics that relates the probability of a measurement outcome to the wave function of a quantum system. It is important because it allows us to make predictions about the behavior of quantum systems, which are essential in many areas of science such as particle physics, chemistry, and material science.

2. How was the Born rule first discovered and by whom?

The Born rule was first proposed by German physicist Max Born in 1926. He derived it from the mathematical formalism of quantum mechanics, which was developed by other physicists such as Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger.

3. Can the Born rule be experimentally confirmed?

Yes, the Born rule has been experimentally confirmed numerous times through various experiments in quantum mechanics. These experiments involve measuring the properties of quantum systems and comparing the results to the predictions of the Born rule.

4. Are there any alternative theories to the Born rule?

Yes, there have been some attempts to develop alternative theories to the Born rule, such as the Many Worlds Interpretation and the Pilot Wave Theory. However, these theories are not widely accepted and have not been able to fully explain all the phenomena observed in quantum mechanics.

5. How does the Born rule relate to the concept of wave-particle duality?

The Born rule is closely related to the concept of wave-particle duality, which states that particles can exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behavior. The Born rule explains how the wave-like behavior of particles can be described by a probability wave, which determines the likelihood of a particle being in a certain state or location. This is essential in understanding the behavior of quantum systems.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
Replies
22
Views
1K
Replies
95
Views
7K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
990
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
5
Views
922
Replies
3
Views
985
Back
Top