I'm having a hard time understanding why it makes sense to say that the particle has an uncertain position to which it can collapse, but not to say that the particle has an uncertain time to which it can collapse.(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Similarly, why do we consider when the particle collapses aswhenwe measure it, but we do not consider where the particle collapses aswherewe measure it? (Or maybe we do and I'm mistaken?)

I figure it has to do with the fact that there's no time operator in QM, but I'm curious if there's any difference to interpreting wave function collapse either way (uncertain where/when vs. it collapses where/when we measure it) conceptually.

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

Dismiss Notice

Join Physics Forums Today!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Time Uncertainty and the Collapse of the Wavefunction

Loading...

Similar Threads for Uncertainty Collapse Wavefunction |
---|

I Electron spin |

I Heisenberg Uncertainty vs Measurement Error |

I Infinite or undefined standard deviation in HUP |

I The inequality in the Heisenberg uncertainty relation |

I Making sure about the spreads in the Uncertainty Principle |

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**