Is complimentarity an expression of HUP?

  • Thread starter Thread starter San K
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Expression Hup
San K
Messages
905
Reaction score
1
Novice questions:

1. All complimentarities seems to be an expression of HUP...

(for example from some of the quantum eraser experiments such as DCQE)

Is that correct? I.e. Complimentarity is NOT a phenomena/mystery that is seperate/different from HUP

2. Can we derive/conclude complimentarities from each other?

For example if we know position & momentum are complimentary;

are we able to derive/conclude that time & energy must be complimentary?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
When writing the Lagrangian in classical mechanics "momentum p conjugate to position q" is:

p=∂L/∂v, where v=dq/dt

If P,Q are the quantum operators that correspond to the original conjugate pair p,q then the quantum commutator satisfies the HUP:

[P,Q] = -ih_bar

Energy and time are _not_ a conjugate pair, and there is no "time operator" in QM.


Complementarity is a principle of the Copenhagen interpretation of QM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarity_(physics )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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!
Back
Top