Infinite Square Well and Energy Eigenstate question

SeannyBoi71
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
Hi all, just studying for my final exam and needed a little clarification on this.

Our prof did an example: Consider a particle of mass m moving in the nth energy eigenstate of a one-dimensional infinite square well of width L. What is the uncertainty in the particle's energy?

He said the answer was that there was no uncertainty simply because it was in this nth energy eigenstate. I don't really understand why this is the case. I thought maybe it had to do with this postulate he mentioned earlier: In any measurement of the observable associated with the operator Q, the only values that will ever be measured are the eigenvalues qn, which satisfy the eigenvalue equation Q*phi = q*phi. Can someone please help me with this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Whenever a system is in an eigenstate of the Hamiltonian, there is a definite value of energy--that's the definition of an eigenstate. However, the system can also be in a superposition of different eigenstates, at which point there will be an uncertainty in the energy--it has a nonzero probability of having the energy of any of the component eigenstates. Does that make sense?
 
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
If we release an electron around a positively charged sphere, the initial state of electron is a linear combination of Hydrogen-like states. According to quantum mechanics, evolution of time would not change this initial state because the potential is time independent. However, classically we expect the electron to collide with the sphere. So, it seems that the quantum and classics predict different behaviours!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...

Similar threads

Back
Top