The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and bacteria

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a student's difficulty in applying the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle to observe a bacterium under a microscope. The student calculates the uncertainty in the bacterium's position using its mass and speed, but finds the uncertainty exceeds the microscope's viewing field. Other participants suggest that the principle may not be relevant for bacteria due to their size and the scale of uncertainty involved. They recommend using the DeBroglie wavelength to analyze the situation instead. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the need to correctly apply physics concepts to biological observations.
plstevens
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
A student is examining a bacterium under the microscope. The bacterial cell has a mass of 0.200 (a femtogram is 10^-15) and is swimming at 4.00 microns per second, with an uncertainty in the speed of 5.00%. E.coli bacterial cells are around 1 micron, or 10^-6 meters in length. The student is each supposed to observe the bacterium and make a drawing. However, the student, having just learned about the Heisenberg uncertainty principle in physics class, complains that she cannot make the drawing. She claims that the uncertainty of the bacterium's position is greater than the microscope's viewing field, and the bacterium is thus impossible to locate.

A. What is the uncertainty of the position of the bacterium? Answer should be in m.

i don't understand this at all and there's no examples in my book can someone just help me with this one?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I do know that the standard rule is to show an attempt but there is no examples in my textbook. So, if someone could help me that would be greatly appreciated.
 
if you write up Heisenbergs uncertainty principle and plug in the numbers from the exercise you should see that the uncertainty principle is not so relevant for the bacteria.

Try to write up the equation and put in the numbers...
 
ok, is this how i should set this equation up?

(4*10^-6)(2*10^-15)(5.00%)>=h/4(phi)
 
equation

[(4*10^-6)(2*10^-19)(5.00%)]*x>=h/4(phi)

where 'x' is uncertainity in position of bacteria'[(4*10^-6)(2*10^-19)(5.00%)]' is uncertainity in momentum(velocity*mass*%uncertainity in momentum)

now acc to heinsberg equation
(uncertainity in momentum)*(uncertainity in position)>=h/4phi
 
I would instead look at the DeBroglie thesis... apply a wavelength to the bacterium and then show the wavelength and find uncertainty as based upon that... it gets you around statistical mechanics.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top