Quantum Distance? (See me derive it.)

  • Thread starter Thread starter LiteHacker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derive Quantum
LiteHacker
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
As per: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_charge
Charge is quantum.

As per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_flux_quantum
Magnetic flux is quantum.

Magnetic flux is measured as follows:
Magnetic flux = \frac{Energy * Time}{Charge}


Thus:
\frac{Charge}{Magnetic flux} is quantum. (Quantum/Quantum = Quantum)

It has the measurement:
\frac{Charge}{Magnetic flux} = \frac{Charge ^{2}}{Energy * Time}



As per: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Klitzing_constant
Conductivity is quantum.

Conductivity is measured as follows:
Conductivity = \frac{Charge ^{2}}{Energy * Time * Distance}


Taking the top two questions:
Conductivity = \frac{\frac{Charge}{Magnetic flux}}{Distance}

Quantum = Quantum / Distance
Quantum / Quantum = Distance = Quantum

Distance is quantum.

Anybody see anything wrong with this?

Thank you,
Veniamin
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"is quantum" does not make sense. I think you mean "is quantised".

Conductivity can show quantum effects, but this does not mean that there are fundamental steps of conductivity.
 
mfb said:
"is quantum" does not make sense. I think you mean "is quantised".
Indeed this is what I meant.

mfb said:
Conductivity can show quantum effects, but this does not mean that there are fundamental steps of conductivity.
Instead of there being fundamental steps of conductivity, conductivity is noted to be rational. (You can express it as a fraction of quantised values.)
Can the same be said for distance then, as per what was shown above?

Thank you,
Veniamin
 
LiteHacker said:
Instead of there being fundamental steps of conductivity, conductivity is noted to be rational. (You can express it as a fraction of quantised values.)
As resistance due to the quantum hall effect, in two-dimensional systems at low temperature and strong magnetic field.

There is a way to generate a quantised resistance, but it does not mean that resistance IS always quantised as charge is.


Oh, and I found an error in your dimensional analysis:

Electric charge: e
Magnetic flux quantum: Φ = h/(2e)
Quantum hall effect constant: e^2/h

No, you don't get a length here. In more basic units, conductivity is charge^2 time^3/(mass length^2).
 
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!
According to recent podcast between Jacob Barandes and Sean Carroll, Barandes claims that putting a sensitive qubit near one of the slits of a double slit interference experiment is sufficient to break the interference pattern. Here are his words from the official transcript: Is that true? Caveats I see: The qubit is a quantum object, so if the particle was in a superposition of up and down, the qubit can be in a superposition too. Measuring the qubit in an orthogonal direction might...
Back
Top