Probability of simultaneous measurements of momentum and position

Karl G.
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Query:
Given a three- dimensional wavefunction (phi) (x, y, z),
what is the probability of simultaneously measuring
momentum and position to obtain the results
a < y < b and p' < Pz < P" ?
I know that integration of the square norm of the wavefunction of the region
under question yields the probability for finding the position or momentum
of the system described by the wavefunction. But how do you do this
for simultaneous measurements of momentum and position?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you mean by "simultaneous measurement"? One single measurement that immediately produces both values of the observable? Don't you think that if this is the case, then it doesn't matter how we proceed with the sequence of AB versus BA for non-commuting observables?

Zz.
 
Karl G. said:
Query:
Given a three- dimensional wavefunction (phi) (x, y, z),
what is the probability of simultaneously measuring
momentum and position to obtain the results
a < y < b and p' < Pz < P" ?
I know that integration of the square norm of the wavefunction of the region
under question yields the probability for finding the position or momentum
of the system described by the wavefunction. But how do you do this
for simultaneous measurements of momentum and position?

Thanks!

x, y, and pz are three mutually commuting observables, so it would be convenient to write your wave function in the corresponding basis (phi)(x, y, pz). (To do that, you can perform a Fourier transform of your position-space wave function (phi) (x, y, z) on the variable z.) The next step would be to take the square of the modulus |(phi)(x, y, pz)|^2 and integrate it on the given region of y and pz.
 
Sorry to ZapperZ for ambguities in phrasing. However, meopemuk's answer was the one I was looking for. Thanks!
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...

Similar threads

Back
Top