Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Uncertainty and the > sign

  1. Jun 12, 2012 #1
    I don't know much about brackets and Hamiltonians, but there is a much simpler aspect of the time / energy uncertainty discussion that confuses me. It has to do with the sign of the uncertainty. [Disclaimer: Purists, please bear with me for a moment as I hash out my point heuristically.]

    Here's the typical argument that I hear against the vacuum fluctuation hypothesis of the Big Bang: The energy of a system can be "unknown / inconstant / immeasurable / whatever" within a range of values ΔE, but ONLY FOR LESS TIME than Δt. Larger energy fluctuations are doomed to a shorter lifespan. So a fluctuation the size of the universe would have a Δt of about one googolth of a second. (Perhaps the only opportunity I'll ever have to use the fraction "one googolth"!)

    But the damn formula has a GREATER THAN sign in it! On its face mathematically, the inequality shows us that Δt must be LONGER than h/ΔE. Why do discussions of the principle always invoke an upper bound, when the formula gives a lower bound? Is there indeed an upper bound on ΔEΔt? Or is this inequality understood to mean "greater than but approximately equal to?"
     
  2. jcsd
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Can you offer guidance or do you also need help?
Draft saved Draft deleted



Similar Discussions: Uncertainty and the > sign
  1. The uncertainty (Replies: 9)

Loading...