Some basic misunderstanding in Quantum Mechanics

In summary: The "spikening" is a postulate, and it's quite weird. In another interpretation, the "spikening" is deduced/it's a result, having to do with an effect called "decoherence".2. The mass is just the ordinary mass. But if you want, it's equal to the average of the ensemble, since all identically prepared systems have the same mass, but I don't think looking at it like this is helpful and you likely have some sort of misconception about this notion of ensemble averaging, but it's hard to say what exactly.Dear mr. vodka,Thanks for your response. I understand the concept of ensemble averaging, but I'm still not
  • #1
junhui.liao
7
0
Hi, guys,

As a beginner, I have some problems to understand QM.
Thanks a lot in advance for your response !

1. According to QM interpretation, the measured particles, they become spike, do they have chances to back normal status (the status before becoming spikes)? If yes, how? if no, why?

2. If I understand correctly, any kinds of particles, after being measured, become same spikes(described by Dirac function), or not? it sounds very artificial / weird if it is. Naively, how (god?) could make the particles become same spikes just after being measured? Or the same spikes postulation is just a temporary successful theory/model which has sustained experimental test for a few decades?

3. According to QM, the expectation value <x> is the average of repeated measurements on an ensemble of identically prepared systems. Then when calculating momentum p = mv, what's the "m" ? It's the average mass of those "an ensemble of identically prepared systems" ? If yes, then how to know the number of systems were involved when measurement was processed? If not, it would be the sum of mass of all measured systems? So, if this interpretation is correct, then the momentum is a kind of "hybrid" quantity in the sense of the <v> = d<x>/dt come from average value while the "m" come from sum of all systems. Or, I missed everything?

BTW, I'm mainly reading Griffiths QM, 2nd version, international edition.

Thanks again !
Cheers,
JH
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
1. The "spikes" become non-"spikes". This is because the Schrödinger equation tends to widen it (if you start with something delta function-esque, it evolves into a Gaussian that keeps getting wider; at least in vacuum (i.e. V = 0)).

2. It depends, in the most common interpretation the "spikening" is a postulate yes. And it is quite weird. In another interpretation (pilot-wave theory a.k.a. de broglie bohm interpretation) the spikening is deduced/it's a result, having to do with an effect called "decoherence".

3. The m is just the ordinary mass. But if you want, it's equal to the average of the ensemble, since all identically prepared systems have the same mass, but I don't think looking at it like this is helpful and you likely have some sort of misconception about this notion of ensemble averaging, but it's hard to say what exactly.
 
  • #3
Dear mr. vodka,

Thanks a lot for your response !

Still, I would like to discuss a little bit more on those topics.

1. As to the "spike" and "non-spike" transformation, it's a kind of "double-way" transformation, right? I'd like to make water wave as an example to understand it, make a comment on this if possible please.
Imaging the water waves in sea, they usually have small fluctuation(tide) - this kind of "quiet" fluctuation(tide) due to the gravitation between Earth and moon. Well, once a bomb was threw down from a plane to the quiet sea surface(corresponding to a measurement performed on a particle), a water "spike" produced. Later, the "spike" get wider and wider, finally back to original status - small fluctuation(tide).
The point is if no external perturbation, particle always keep fluctuating like water wave, right? Then, why particle "select" this kind of way as their "life style"? Does the gravitation also the "power source" of particle's fluctuation? But in the scale of particle, gravitons might be "seen" only in very high energy scale(> 1000Tev ?).

2. OK.

3. Thanks a lot for your statement of "all identically prepared systems have the same mass".
I doubted the m because in particle physics, there are many unbelievable things. For instance, the mass of proton is ~938 Mev, while its composed quarks u and d are 2.4 and 4.8 Mev separately. Which means the sum of three quarks u + u + d ~=10 Mev. The variation is too big(938 Mev vs 10Mev), right?
So, I think I might missed some fundamental concepts on mass in QM. And the mass definition in quantum mechanics is not so clear(at least to me).

Thanks again
JH
 

1. What is the main concept behind quantum mechanics?

The main concept behind quantum mechanics is that at the microscopic level, particles behave differently than what we observe in the macroscopic world. These particles can exist in multiple states at once, known as superposition, and their behavior is described by probabilities rather than definite outcomes.

2. What is the uncertainty principle in quantum mechanics?

The uncertainty principle states that it is impossible to know both the position and momentum of a particle at the same time with absolute certainty. This is due to the wave-particle duality of particles in quantum mechanics, where they can behave as both particles and waves simultaneously.

3. How does quantum entanglement work?

Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon in which two or more particles become connected in a way that their states are dependent on each other, even when separated by large distances. This means that changing the state of one particle will affect the state of the other, regardless of the physical distance between them.

4. Can quantum mechanics explain the behavior of large objects?

No, quantum mechanics only applies to the behavior of particles at the microscopic level. At the macroscopic level, the effects of quantum mechanics are negligible and are overshadowed by classical mechanics.

5. How is quantum mechanics related to the concept of parallel universes?

The concept of parallel universes is a theoretical possibility in some interpretations of quantum mechanics. According to the Many-Worlds Interpretation, every time a measurement is made, the universe splits into multiple parallel universes, each with a different outcome. However, this is still a highly debated and unproven concept in quantum mechanics.

Similar threads

Replies
44
Views
3K
Replies
21
Views
983
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
3
Views
300
Replies
48
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
961
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
4
Views
986
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
928
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
24
Views
1K
Back
Top