Position vector r and uncertainty principle

MHD93
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
Hi physicists,

How can two atomic-scale particles interact through gravitation (Gm1m2/r^2) or any other force that is a function of r if r isn't know with complete certainty. Is it that the force itself also comprises uncertainty in its value?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In the model where the uncertainty principle is used, we don't use "forces" to describe interactions. The classical equations like the one you used for an example are not used. These are considered to be obeyed only on average.

What happens is that the uncertainty in relative position and momentum leads to an uncertainty in the outcomes of the interactions. Interactions are described by operators on a range of possibilities and the outcome is treated statistically by summing over all possible outcomes.
 
Also the gravitational attraction between two sub-atomic particles is absurdly negligible. Although you can demonstrate the effect of say Earth's gravity on quantum mechanics through some neat little interference experiments, I believe Shankar (or is it Sakurai) discusses this.
 
Simon Bridge said:
In the model where the uncertainty principle is used, we don't use "forces" to describe interactions. The classical equations like the one you used for an example are not used. These are considered to be obeyed only on average.

What happens is that the uncertainty in relative position and momentum leads to an uncertainty in the outcomes of the interactions. Interactions are described by operators on a range of possibilities and the outcome is treated statistically by summing over all possible outcomes.

If we use the potential function for such forces (such as the electrical force potential), Doesn't that mean that we use "forces" to describe interactions?
 
No - it doesn't.
There are lots of different ways to describe situations and interactions - to be true they have to be related to each other. The different descripton lend themselves to different models... eg. compare analyzing a object sliding down a hill via conservation of energy and by Newton's Laws. But, you know, if you want to think of using mv2/2 = mgh is the same thing as using mgsinθ-μN=ma then I'm not going to argue with you ;)

I do want to echo, and add to, @Many_S_Theory's observation - you realize how small the uncertainties in HUP are right? We are not talking about really big variations.

You could argue that "OK, maybe not gravity - but how about electric fields then" in which case I'd want to respond that in the scale where HUP is important, we do not use the electric potential or Coulombs Force Law and so forth ... on that scale the electromagnetic interaction is described in terms of individual photons and Feynman diagrams.

However, I believe:
What happens is that the uncertainty in relative position and momentum leads to an uncertainty in the outcomes of the interactions.
... answers your original question.
 
Last edited:
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