QM & Motion: Is There Consensus?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Zelebg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity Motion
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of motion in quantum mechanics (QM), specifically whether motion is continuous or discrete. Participants explore various interpretations of QM and the implications for understanding particle behavior, with a focus on theoretical and conceptual aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that in orthodox QM, particles are represented by a continuous wave-function, leading to a continuous probability distribution for their location, but do not follow a specific trajectory.
  • It is mentioned that expectation values in QM can follow classical laws, as described by Ehrenfest's Theorem, which relates expected position and momentum.
  • One participant raises a question about whether a particle moves continuously or jumps between points, suggesting that neither interpretation accurately reflects QM.
  • Another participant describes a free electron as a "wave packet," indicating that while it has a probability distribution, it does not have a definite position or velocity at any given time.
  • There is a viewpoint that the question of what constitutes motion in QM is complex and lacks consensus, with references to various interpretations such as knowledge, probability, and nonlocal fields.
  • One participant asserts that QM does not involve non-continuous motion, emphasizing that time evolution is governed by a differential equation, thus ruling out literal "quantum jumps."

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of motion in QM, with no consensus reached on whether motion is continuous or discrete. The discussion reflects a range of interpretations and uncertainties regarding the implications of QM for understanding motion.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in defining motion within QM, including the dependence on interpretations and the complexities of measurement in quantum systems. There are unresolved questions regarding the nature of particles and their behavior in different experimental contexts.

Zelebg
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Is there consensus on the stance of QM in regards whether motion is actually continuous or not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Zelebg said:
Is there consensus on the stance of QM in regards whether motion is actually continuous or not?

In orthodox QM, a particle is represented by a continuous wave-function. In that sense, the probability that you find a particle at a particular location is a continuous distribution. But, there is no sense in which the particle follows a specific trajectory ##x(t)##, with the position of the particle being well-defined for every time ##t##.

The expectation values, however, do generally follow classical laws. This is Ehrenfest's Theorem. For example:

##\langle p \rangle = m \frac{d \langle x \rangle}{dt}##

This says that the "expected" position of a particle at time ##t## is related to the expected value of its momentum according to the classical formula.

PS If, however, you question was: "does a particle move continuously from A to B, or jump from A to B in a sequence of discrete steps?"; then, neither of these is an accurate interpretation of QM.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba, vanhees71 and Dale
PeroK said:
PS If, however, you question was: "does a particle move continuously from A to B, or jump from A to B in a sequence of discrete steps?"; then, neither of these is an accurate interpretation of QM.

It's a question I had from a long time ago, so I forgot exactly where and what, but some QM descriptions seemed to imply electron would simply appear at point B, sometimes even before disappearing from point A, but in any case would appear at new position without actually traversing the distance.
 
Zelebg said:
It's a question I had from a long time ago, so I forgot exactly where and what, but some QM descriptions seemed to imply electron would simply appear at point B, sometimes even before disappearing from point A, but in any case would appear at new position without actually traversing the distance.

A free electron is best described as a "wave packet", which corresponds to the probability distribution of the electron's position. The wave packet itself moves with a given velocity. But, it doesn't define a definite position or a definite velocity for the electron at any time. If you measure the velocity of the electron at any time, again you get value taken from the probability distribution.

The key to understanding QM is to understand that the quantities you measure are governed by probabilities. You can only say an electron is at point A if you measure it and find it at point A. You can't measure an electron to be at point A and point B at the same time.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
Motion of what? This question is just too Big. There is no consensus what moves in qm(knowledge, probability, nonlocal fields, nonlocal guiding waves, etc.).

What moves in the delayed choice quantum eraser(a variant of the double slit experiment)?

QM is a theory of measurements via the Born rule - it is slightly more correct to assume motion is non-continuous.

For some profound reason classicality plays a big role in the quantum world, as long as you probe with classical sized devices.
 
Last edited:
In QM there's nothing noncontinuous. The time evolution is given by a differential equation and thus there cannot be "quantum jumps" in the literal sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
472
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 61 ·
3
Replies
61
Views
4K