The uncertainty principle and electric field strength

snoopies622
Messages
852
Reaction score
29
As my knowledge of an electric field strength becomes more precise, what physical quantity becomes correspondingly less precisely known?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There's no (direct) analogue of the "uncertainy principle" in quantum field theory.
 
dextercioby said:
There's no (direct) analogue of the "uncertainy principle" in quantum field theory.
One can start with the Maxwell Lagrangian and show that there are three pairs of canonical conjugate field operators

[A_i(x),E_k(y)] = i\,\delta_{ik}\,\delta^{(3)}(x-y)

The problem is that we have a gauge theory, so there are unphysical d.o.f. which we have to eliminate; a first choice is the A°=0 gauge b/c for A° there's no E° due to the antisymmetry of the field strength tensor F and therefore ∂°A° is not present in F. Even then not all three i=1..3 are physical, we have to eliminate a second one to arrive at two physical polarizations.

Using Fourier decomposition one can introduce creation and annihilation operators for the fields; in terms of these operators it becomes clear that the canonically conjugate pair x,p is replaced by something like the Fourier modes of A and E, therefore one can derive an uncertainty principle for A(k) and E(k) where k is representing momentum space.
 
Thank you both. Good stuff. : )
 
tom.stoer said:

One can start with the Maxwell Lagrangian and show that there are three pairs of canonical conjugate field operators

[A_i(x),E_k(y)] = i\,\delta_{ik}\,\delta^{(3)}(x-y)

The problem is that we have a gauge theory, so there are unphysical d.o.f. which we have to eliminate; a first choice is the A°=0 gauge b/c for A° there's no E° due to the antisymmetry of the field strength tensor F and therefore ∂°A° is not present in F. Even then not all three i=1..3 are physical, we have to eliminate a second one to arrive at two physical polarizations.

Using Fourier decomposition one can introduce creation and annihilation operators for the fields; in terms of these operators it becomes clear that the canonically conjugate pair x,p is replaced by something like the Fourier modes of A and E, therefore one can derive an uncertainty principle for A(k) and E(k) where k is representing momentum space.

Here A are operators,similarly in quantum field theory these exist these kinds of relation for bosons and also for fermions but that is rather anticommutation.
 
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!
Back
Top