Uncertainty Principle: How Does Position Depend on Photon Wavelength?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, particularly through the example of Heisenberg's microscope, which illustrates the trade-off between measuring an electron's position and momentum using photons of varying wavelengths. Short-wavelength photons provide accurate position measurements but lead to uncertain momentum, while long-wavelength photons do the opposite. The feasibility of using both short and long wavelengths simultaneously is questioned, with technical challenges highlighted regarding the timing of photon collisions with electrons. Participants note that current technology limits the ability to resolve simultaneous photon impacts, complicating the measurement process. The conversation concludes with speculation about future advancements in monitoring quantum systems that may reveal new patterns not accounted for by conventional quantum mechanics.
zodas
Messages
9
Reaction score
1
I have a quite simple doubt.

One of the practical applications of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle is given by Heisenberg's microscope. In this thought expt. Heisenberg imagines of a hypothetical microscope in which an observer attempts to measure the position and momentum of an electron simultaneously by shooting a photon at it.

If the photon has short wavelength and high momentum, the position will be measured accurately but the momentum will be uncertain, if not, the converse will happen.

How does the uncertainty of position depends on the wavelength of photon ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angular_resolution"
On the other hand, nothing prevents you from using at the same time both short and long wavelength light. Usually this possibility is not being discussed - for reasons that are not being given.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
zodas: Heisenberg's microscope is an elementary way of skimming the principle, it gives insight, the only application is pedagogical. The actual derivation is much more rigorous.

arkajad: Having two photons hitting the same electron simultaneously is quite an obstacle. No current technology can resolve less than a 10e-16s time delay, which is all that is need to make the system a succession of 2 collisions, each involving 1 photon and 1 electron.
 
Last edited:
Dr Lots-o'watts said:
arkajad: Having two photons hitting the same electron simultaneously is quite an obstacle.

It does not matter. You are not able to control the time of hitting the electron even with one photon. It hits when it hits.
 
Exactly. That can also be said to be a consequence of HUP.
 
Nevertheless I would venture to predict that when one day we will be able to monitor continuously two non-commuting observables, we will see a particular chaotic pattern in the experimental data, this pattern is not predicted by an ordinary quantum theory, but can be predicted by the theories somewhat more predictive than QM in its textbooks' version that has answers ready only for joint probability distributions of mutually commuting observables. But that's just my guess based on reading many papers on continuous monitoring of quantum systems.
 
I am slowly going through the book 'What Is a Quantum Field Theory?' by Michel Talagrand. I came across the following quote: One does not" prove” the basic principles of Quantum Mechanics. The ultimate test for a model is the agreement of its predictions with experiments. Although it may seem trite, it does fit in with my modelling view of QM. The more I think about it, the more I believe it could be saying something quite profound. For example, precisely what is the justification of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
842
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K