While browsing Wikipedia I bumped into this sentence that seemed partially wrong to me but maybe I didn't understand what it is referring to so would like for some expert to help me elucidate it: "Even if an elementary particle has a delocalized wavepacket, the wavepacket is in fact a quantum superposition of quantum states wherein the particle is exactly localized. This is not true for a composite particle, which can never be represented as a superposition of exactly-localized quantum states."(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

There are two parts: If the wavepacket is a superposition of plane waves, in what sense are they "quantum states wherein the particle is exactly localized"?

And if this was so, why in the bound state wavepacket case this can never be so?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Localization of states and elementary vs composite in QM

Loading...

Similar Threads for Localization states elementary |
---|

I Non-locality in MWI |

A Is there a local interpretation of Reeh-Schlieder theorem? |

I EM Radiation of "Permanent" Molecular Electric Dipoles |

I Gauge Symmetry |

B Preserving local realism in the EPR experiment |

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**