Quadrature Operators & Uncertainty Principle

  • Thread starter Thread starter McLaren Rulez
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Operator
McLaren Rulez
Messages
289
Reaction score
3
Hi,

This may seem like a silly question but if we have an operator of the form aX+bP where a and b are some numbers and X and P are the position and momentum operators, doesn't this violate the uncertainty principle. Isn't it sort of measuring position and momentum simulataneously?

I recently came across quadrature operators where a=cos\theta and b=sin\theta. So how is this consistent with the uncertainty principle?

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't understand, what has the new operator have to do with the uncertainty principle ? If b≠0 for a≠0 then the operator, call it A, is different than both X and P which enter the uncertainty principle...
 
Sorry, I think I may have had a bit of a misconception there.

I thought that being an eigenstate of a linear combination of X and P meant that the state was an eigenstate of X and P separately as well. Now its obvious that this was wrong. Sorry about that. Thank you for replying dextercioby.
 
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...
Back
Top