How Does Superimposing Waves Illuminate the Uncertainty Principle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vorde
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Waves
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between superimposing waves and the uncertainty principle in quantum physics. The book being referenced explains that a single wave function with a definite position leads to oscillating probability values across an infinite range. In contrast, superimposing multiple waves with slight phase variations results in localization of the wave function. This approach raises questions about why such superposition leads to a non-repeating wave function that centralizes around a specific point. The conversation highlights the distinction between free and bound electrons regarding their wave functions and probability densities.
Vorde
Messages
786
Reaction score
0
I am reading a very good book on physics/mathematics currently. While it ends up branching off into some really interesting stuff, the first couple chapters introduce the (assumed) unprepared reader to foundations of modern quantum physics, with one chapter focusing on the uncertainty principle.

Instead of simply passing it off as something that just exists, the book explains the necessity of the Uncertainty Principle by showing that a single wave function with definite position gives oscillating values of probability over an infinite range. And that when instead of one wave function, you superimpose a plethora of similar waves with a phase varying (by h-bar/2 I think, though that's not important), you get localization of the wave function.

Now at first glance this seemed like a new and incredibly intuitive approach to the uncertainty principle, but as I thought about it more I don't understand it.

Why does a range of waves with equal wavelength/amplitude but slight variations in phase cause localization of the wave function that doesn't repeat every period, and instead centralizes around one point?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your second paragraph seems contradictory...a single wave function with definite position IS localized...thats where it is located.

For example the probability density function (wave) of a free electron extends everywhere, but a bound electron...in a box or attached to a local nucleus...has a localized wave function...
 
Last edited:
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top