Heisenberg uncertainty question

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter lightoflife
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Heisenberg Uncertainty
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle (HUP) and its implications for measuring the position and momentum of particles in quantum mechanics. Participants explore the nuances of the principle, particularly in relation to a quote from Stephen Hawking regarding the predictability of measurements in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on Hawking's statement about predicting a combination of position and velocity, questioning how such predictions can be made if only one can be known accurately at a time.
  • Another participant asserts that the uncertainty principle does not limit the accuracy of measuring position or momentum individually, but rather that the variances of these measurements are constrained by the HUP.
  • A different participant explains that measuring two non-commuting observables can yield information about both, provided that the measurements are not made with excessive precision, referencing the concept of entangled particles.
  • One participant critiques Hawking's quote as misleading, emphasizing that while both position and momentum can be measured, they cannot be known simultaneously with arbitrary accuracy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing interpretations of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and its implications. There is no consensus on the accuracy of Hawking's statement, with some defending it and others challenging its clarity and correctness.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the importance of measurement precision and the statistical nature of quantum states, indicating that assumptions about measurement accuracy and the nature of observables are critical to the discussion.

lightoflife
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I read this article by Hawking which includes this quote "
In classical mechanics one can
predict the results of measuring both the
position and the velocity of a particle.
In quantum mechanics the uncertainty
principle says that only one of these
measurements can be predicted; the ob
server can predict the result of measur
ing either the position or the velocity but
not both. Alternatively he can predict
the result of measuring one combination
of position and velocity."

Can someone elaborate on the last sentence "Alternatively he can predict
the result of measuring one combination of position and velocity"

How is that supposed to work exactly? If you can know only one or the other then how do you measure the combination to predict anything?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know what Hawking meant. I can however tell you what the correct statement of the principle is.

Suppose you have a large number of similarly prepared systems ie all are in the same quantum state. Divide them into two equal lots. In the first lot measure position to a high degree of accuracy. QM places no limit on that accuracy - its a misunderstanding of the uncertainty principle thinking it does. The result you get will have a statistical spread. In the second lot measure momentum to a high degree of accuracy - again QM places no limit on that. It will also have a statistical spread. The variances of those spreads will be as per the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
lightoflife said:
I read this article by Hawking which includes this quote "
In classical mechanics one can
predict the results of measuring both the
position and the velocity of a particle.
In quantum mechanics the uncertainty
principle says that only one of these
measurements can be predicted; the ob
server can predict the result of measur
ing either the position or the velocity but
not both. Alternatively he can predict
the result of measuring one combination
of position and velocity."

Can someone elaborate on the last sentence "Alternatively he can predict
the result of measuring one combination of position and velocity"

How is that supposed to work exactly? If you can know only one or the other then how do you measure the combination to predict anything?

Yes, this scenario is actually an application of the HUP. It is the product of 2 non-commuting observables' standard deviations which cannot be less than a certain quantity (a constant). A measurement (say p) which is not intended to be more accurate than a certain value can be executed. Another (say q) which is also not intended to be more accurate than a certain value can then be executed. As long as those are properly executed, you will know a combination of p and q as Hawking says.

This could, for example, be done on entangled particles: execute a measurement of p on Alice, execute a measurement of q on Bob. Done properly, you would not violate the HUP and you would still know a lot about Alice (and Bob). You would know p +/- and you would know q +/-.

Again, you could not execute such measurements with more precision than the HUP allows and expect useful information. This is *not* the EPR example, because in that example non-commuting observables are measured to very tight precision. So the proper execution in my example means the margin of error was intentionally made larger.
 
This is a disappointingly misleading quote from Hawking. There is nothing to stop you from measuring both the position and momentum of a particle, as Hawking seems to imply at first. The HUP states that you cannot simultaneously know both of them at an arbitrary level of accuracy.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K