I Is the Heisenberg-Robertson Uncertainty Relation Always Consistent?

DuckAmuck
Messages
238
Reaction score
40
TL;DR Summary
Something about this is not clear.
The general uncertainty principle is derived to be:
\sigma_A^2 \sigma_B^2 \geq \left(\frac{1}{2} \langle \{A,B\} \rangle -\langle A \rangle \langle B \rangle \right)^2 + \left(\frac{1}{2i} \langle [A,B] \rangle \right)^2
Then it is often "simplified" to be:
\sigma_A^2 \sigma_B^2 \geq \left(\frac{1}{2i} \langle [A,B] \rangle \right)^2
But this simplification only works if:
\left(\frac{1}{2} \langle \{A,B\} \rangle -\langle A \rangle \langle B \rangle \right)^2 \geq 0
However is this condition always met? *
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The anticommutator of two Hermitian operators is Hermitian, hence has a real expectation value. Therefore, the term you are discarding is always positive.

If ##M## is supposed to be a Hermitian operator, then ##B = iM## certainly isn't.
 
  • Like
Likes DuckAmuck and vanhees71
Note that also
$$\hat{C}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{i}} [\hat{A},\hat{B}]$$
is self-adjoint if ##\hat{A}## and ##\hat{B}## are self-adjoint, and thus also the somewhat weaker Heisenberg-Robertson uncertainty relation is consistent, i.e., the left-hand side of the inequality is positive semidefinite. The original stronger uncertainty relation is due to Schrödinger (if needed, I can look for the citation).
 
  • Like
Likes DuckAmuck
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...
Back
Top