I The inequality in the Heisenberg uncertainty relation

Derek P
Messages
297
Reaction score
43
I was musing about why the HUP is an inequality. If you analyse a wave packet the spatial frequency spectral width is inversely proportional to the spatial width. So there should be an equality such as Heisenberg's equation 3 in this paper. Has anyone got a simple explanation of where the inequality comes from? I initially thought it was the fact that we square everything to get probability distributions, but I seem to have a mental block so any help would be appreciated.

Should this be a B level question?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Any state has a variance for each observable. So, there is an equality there which you can calculate for any specific state.

The HUP, however, specifies a minimum across all states. Some states, e.g. Coherent states of the harmonic oscillator have an uncertainty equal to the minimum. Most states have an uncertainty greater than this.
 
  • Like
Likes DrClaude
Derek P said:
I was musing about why the HUP is an inequality. If you analyse a wave packet the spatial frequency spectral width is inversely proportional to the spatial width. So there should be an equality such as Heisenberg's equation 3 in this paper. Has anyone got a simple explanation of where the inequality comes from? I initially thought it was the fact that we square everything to get probability distributions, but I seem to have a mental block so any help would be appreciated.
Should this be a B level question?
One Indian meal later and mental block has gone. Forget it, thanks.
 
Last edited:
You can also calculate the wave packets, for which the equality sign holds. That's a way to introduce coherent and squeezed states!
 
vanhees71 said:
You can also calculate the wave packets, for which the equality sign holds. That's a way to introduce coherent and squeezed states!
Well, yes, once you have the infrastructure of Fock spaces in place :)
 
You don't need Fock spaces here. Just Schrödinger wave-mechanics is sufficient.
 
vanhees71 said:
You don't need Fock spaces here. Just Schrödinger wave-mechanics is sufficient.
Yes, you're right.
 
Back
Top