Heisenberg's uncertainty principle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around estimating the uncertainty in the momentum of an electron confined to a region of width 1 x 10^-10 meters, using the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. There is confusion regarding the application of the equation, specifically why a factor of one-half is omitted in the teacher's solution. The uncertainty relation, ΔxΔp ≥ ħ/2, is confirmed to be applicable for any quantum state, with the equality holding for Gaussian wave functions. The problem is noted to be vague, suggesting the need to evaluate energy eigenstates for a particle in an idealized potential well scenario. Ultimately, the goal is to analyze the momentum and position uncertainties for the bound states of the particle.
bmrick
Messages
44
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


So here's the question

An electron is confined within a region of width 1 X 10^-10 meters.
Estimate the uncertainty in the x component of the electrons momentum


Homework Equations


ΔPΔx\geq(1/2)(h/2pi)



The Attempt at a Solution


The problem appears pretty straight forward. But my teacher has the solution as using the equation
ΔPΔx\geqh/2pi
So I'm lost as to why he got rid of the one half. I looked at the problem thinking, oh this is simple, and then after seeing that he did that I literally have no idea where to start. Can someone explain?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i should add, there is a diagram that shows the length restriction on the electron to be in the y direction
 
Have a look at this

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=39172

Are you certain about the y direction? If we know nothing about the the x position then we can know the x component of momentum with certainty.
 
The point is that the Heisenberg uncertainty relation is valid for any quantum state of the particle. It reads
\Delta x \Delta p \geq \frac{\hbar}{2}.
One can also show that the only (pure) states, were the equality sign holds are Gaussian wave functions.

Here the question is a bit different. It says "the particle is constraint within a region of 10^{-10} \; \mathrm{m}". A bit idealized this means it's trapped in a potential pot with infinitely high walls on an interval of this length.

Unfortunately the question is very vague, and the answer is not unique. What might be behind the question is to estimate the above uncertainty product for the bound states of the so trapped particles in the potential pot (of course with infinitely high walls, there are only bound-state solutions of the energy-eigenvalue problem).

So I guess, what's supposed to be done is to evaluate the energy eigensolutions and then (falsely, but that's another pretty subtle issue!) to assume that the momentum operator is given by the usual expression \hat{p}=-\mathrm{i}\hbar \mathrm{d}_x and evaluate the standard deviation for both position and momentum for the particle in the energy eigenstates and check the uncertainty relation.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top