Physics of Electron Probability Clouds

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of electron probability clouds and their physical interpretation, particularly in relation to the motion of electrons and the implications of measuring their positions. Participants explore the meaning of terms like "faster than time" and how these concepts relate to quantum mechanics and classical modeling of electrons.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the physical meaning of the electron "smear" or probability cloud, suggesting it may imply the electron could be in multiple locations simultaneously.
  • Others argue that the concept of traveling "faster than time" is meaningless and does not contribute to understanding electron behavior.
  • A participant proposes that the electron could be viewed as "everywhere at once" around the nucleus, prompting further clarification on the nature of electron position measurements.
  • There is a discussion about the probability density function (PDF) and how it relates to the expectation value of an electron's position, with some participants suggesting that classical models can be applied in certain contexts, such as in particle accelerators.
  • Another participant raises the question of how to visualize the electron smear traveling and what happens during position measurement, expressing confusion over the conceptual framework.
  • Technical details regarding the evolution of wave packets and their implications for electron behavior are introduced, with references to Gaussian packages and their behavior over time.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the interpretation of electron probability clouds and the implications of measuring electron positions. There is no consensus on the meaning of terms like "faster than time," and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best way to conceptualize electron behavior in quantum mechanics.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note limitations in understanding due to the abstract nature of quantum mechanics and the challenges in visualizing electron behavior. The discussion includes references to classical modeling in particle accelerators, which may not fully capture quantum effects.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying quantum mechanics, particularly in understanding the complexities of electron behavior, probability clouds, and the challenges of measurement in quantum systems.

nuby
Messages
336
Reaction score
0
Is there a physical meaning to the electron "smear" or probability cloud? If an object (electron) was to somehow travel faster than time, wouldn't it appear in multiple locations at once or as a "smear"?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Traveling "faster than time" is meaningless.
 
Ok, switch "faster than time" with "through time differently than regular matter".
 
That makes even less sense.
 
adriank said:
That makes even less sense.
C'mon.. Is my question that hard to comprehend?
 
Yes, it is, because it really doesn't make sense.

The probability "cloud" you speak of refers to the probability density of measuring the electron's position to be at that point, at a specific time. There is no reference to its motion.

What does "faster than time" or "through time differently than regular matter" mean? Seriously?
 
nuby said:
Ok, switch "faster than time" with "through time differently than regular matter".

What do you think "regular matter" is made from? :)
 
adriank said:
Yes, it is, because it really doesn't make sense.

The probability "cloud" you speak of refers to the probability density of measuring the electron's position to be at that point, at a specific time. There is no reference to its motion.

What does "faster than time" or "through time differently than regular matter" mean? Seriously?


I was referring to the concept that an electron (singularity) within a atomic orbit is "everywhere at once" around the nucleus. Is this not correct?
 
Dmitry67 said:
What do you think "regular matter" is made from? :)
I guess I should have said composite particles. But those are probably just as irregular as electrons.
 
  • #10
I don't know if an electron in orbit is considered "everywhere at once". I think what is meant that, if you would measure the position of the electron, you could find it anywhere (even on the moon), but the chance of finding it near the atom it's orbiting around is much much much larger. The 'electron smear' is just the probability wavefunction that tells you the chance of finding an electron at a certain position. Where it was before you measured it isn't really a sensical question, because you would have to measure it to know where it was before you measured it, so you have to measure it before you measure it before you ... etc :p
 
  • #11
So considering an electron in multiple locations at once isn't an accurate description of the actual electron/shell.
 
  • #12
By "the electron traveling faster than light" do you mean that the expectation value of the electrons position, according to the underlying probability distribution function (PDF), is moving faster than light? Or are you thinking of the electron as really just non quantum mechanical object shaking and moving around in circles, ... at very high speeds > c and trying to use that as a way to interpret quantum mechanical (statistical) effects?
 
  • #13
nuby said:
So considering an electron in multiple locations at once isn't an accurate description of the actual electron/shell.

I don't see why that wouldn't be a good way to look upon it ? (at least, that's how I look upon it)
 
  • #14
Hi Peeps,
I'm new to this forum and self study QM. This thread raises an interesting question for me. How does science picture say an electron traveling in a straight line. The prob. amplitude wavepacket travels wth the velocity of the electron.! When we make make a measurement of its position , we have the probality of that result... psi ^2.! But how do we picture the electron smear traveling .? Do we picture an electron cloud with the ghostly electron smeared in it traveling withh velocity v and if so, how do we picture what happens when we measure it's position.?
I know the answer will probably be.. we can't!
BUT IT STILL PUZZLES ME ?
tHANKS!
 
  • #15
enomanus said:
Hi Peeps,
I'm new to this forum and self study QM. This thread raises an interesting question for me. How does science picture say an electron traveling in a straight line. The prob. amplitude wavepacket travels wth the velocity of the electron.! When we make make a measurement of its position , we have the probality of that result... psi ^2.! But how do we picture the electron smear traveling .? Do we picture an electron cloud with the ghostly electron smeared in it traveling withh velocity v and if so, how do we picture what happens when we measure it's position.?
I know the answer will probably be.. we can't!
BUT IT STILL PUZZLES ME ?
tHANKS!

I work at a linear electron particle accelerator, and we model such electrons classically. All our particle tracking codes that we use to study the beam dynamics are all classical (relativistic) Maxwell equations acting on classical particles. And it WORKS!

Zz.
 
  • #16
ZapperZ said:
I work at a linear electron particle accelerator, and we model such electrons classically. All our particle tracking codes that we use to study the beam dynamics are all classical (relativistic) Maxwell equations acting on classical particles. And it WORKS!

Zz.

enomanus said:
Hi Peeps,
I'm new to this forum and self study QM. This thread raises an interesting question for me. How does science picture say an electron traveling in a straight line. The prob. amplitude wavepacket travels wth the velocity of the electron.! When we make make a measurement of its position , we have the probality of that result... psi ^2.! But how do we picture the electron smear traveling .? Do we picture an electron cloud with the ghostly electron smeared in it traveling withh velocity v and if so, how do we picture what happens when we measure it's position.?
I know the answer will probably be.. we can't!
BUT IT STILL PUZZLES ME ?
tHANKS!

It smears in time yes. But the reason why you could look on it classically for particle accelerators (as Zz mention) is that the time is so short, since particles travels close to the speed of light (Or?).

Assume you have a Gaussian package at t0 with size a0 (standard deviation) which travels with some "average" speed v. For the free particle case the evolution of this package is easy to calculate.

[tex]\Psi_0=\exp\left(i\hbar k_0-(\frac{x-x_0}{a_0})^2\right)[/tex]

the "size" a will increase in time roughly as (for more exact result use the free Green propagator):

[tex]a(t)=\sqrt{\frac{\hbar t}{m}-a_0^2}[/tex]

using [tex]m\;v_0=\hbar k_0[/tex] and, total time T=L/v0, and wavelength [tex]\lambda=2\pi\hbar/mv_0[/tex] you could play around with what you get after distance L, with speed v0 and with initial smearing size a0.

Also the potentials involved in accelerators are macroscopic, i.e., the typical "size" of them are much larger than the wavelength and a0 of the electrons, so you could safely look on the electron as a point particle. But things changes if the electron hits a region with interaction distance similar to its wavelength (slit, or double-slit for example).
 
  • #17
per.sundqvist said:
Also the potentials involved in accelerators are macroscopic, i.e., the typical "size" of them are much larger than the wavelength and a0 of the electrons, so you could safely look on the electron as a point particle. But things changes if the electron hits a region with interaction distance similar to its wavelength (slit, or double-slit for example).

Correct. Or the potential a "free electron" sees in a periodic crystal lattice. In such cases, then the classical electron model can easily break down.

Zz.
 
  • #18
msumm21 said:
By "the electron traveling faster than light" do you mean that the expectation value of the electrons position, according to the underlying probability distribution function (PDF), is moving faster than light?

This is more relevant to what I was thinking/wonder about.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K