I Macroscopic object wave function

fhenryco
Messages
62
Reaction score
5
A composite object made of many atoms has a large mass hence a small de Broglie wavethength...and we know that recent experiments succeeded to obtain interference patterns even for such objects (for instance the C60 molecule). Did theoretician understood how a wavefunction with such a small wavelength could arise from the wave functions of the smaller particles inside the macroscopic objects that have larger wavethengthes ? Or is the wavefunction of the big object just a kind of heuristic tool that no one should try to understand in term of the subparts wavefuntions ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
De Broglie wavethength is very approximate tool.
The quantum function of large (heavy) object can be visualized as "pinned" (i.e. constrained) by each particle, with each pinning "rigidity" proportional to particle impulse, producing something resembling wavelet. De Broglie wavethength is approximation for the total wavelet size when it is much larger than distance between individual particles. At higher impulses, large object is better described as just sum of wavefunctions of constituent particles.
 
Last edited:
The Bohr Correspondence Principle says that large number of atoms approaches Newtonian Mechanics.
 
trurle said:
De Broglie wavethength is very approximate tool.
The quantum function of large (heavy) object can be visualized as "pinned" (i.e. constrained) by each particle, with each pinning "rigidity" proportional to particle impulse, producing something resembling wavelet. De Broglie wavethength is approximation for the total wavelet size when it is much larger than distance between individual particles. At higher impulses, large object is better described as just sum of wavefunctions of constituent particles.
Thanks ! very interesting, Would you have a reference on the subject ?
 
Is there proof of the correctness of the de Broglie wavelength for macroscopic objects?
The proof based on the analogy with light for elementary particles is familiar to me.
 
fhenryco said:
Did theoretician understood how a wavefunction with such a small wavelength could arise from the wave functions of the smaller particles inside the macroscopic objects that have larger wavethengthes ?
See my paper https://arxiv.org/abs/1406.3221 Sec. 2. The idea is to represent N particle positions by one center-of-mass position and N-1 relative positions. The center of mass has a large mass (the sum of all individual masses), so it has a small wavelength.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes wnvl2 and PeterDonis
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
Back
Top