Uncertainty principle on P and E exchange

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationships between position, momentum, energy, and time in the context of quantum mechanics, particularly focusing on the uncertainty principle and the commutation of operators. Participants explore how these quantities are interrelated and the implications for measurements in quantum systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that momentum can be expressed as energy, leading to the idea that different pairs of quantities (position, momentum, energy, time) might form uncertainty relations.
  • One participant asserts that the total energy depends on position, suggesting that these quantities do not commute in general.
  • Another participant questions the existence of position in a universe with only a single particle, indicating a relative nature of the term.
  • There is a discussion about the commutation of operators, with some stating that for a free particle, momentum and kinetic energy commute, while others argue that position and momentum do not commute.
  • Participants discuss the implications of measuring one quantity precisely affecting the uncertainty of another, particularly in relation to the uncertainty principle.
  • Some participants express that if one measures position precisely, it results in uncertainty in momentum, and vice versa, reinforcing the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the relationships and commutation of operators, particularly in the context of free particles versus particles under potential forces. The discussion remains unresolved with no consensus on the nuances of these relationships.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of operators and the specific conditions under which certain pairs may or may not commute. The discussion does not resolve the mathematical intricacies involved in these relationships.

luxiaolei
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Hi,all, I am wondering, momentum can expressed as energy, so:

dxdP can expresses as dxdE ?

then position, momentum, energy,time are all related, and they all form uncertainty relations??

in the view of commute the operators, all these four operators can NOT commute??

where am I wrong?

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The total energy depends on position as well, thus does not commute. You could say for a free particle everything commutes however in a universe with only a single particle I am not sure such a term as position would even exist as it is a relative term.
 
LostConjugate said:
The total energy depends on position as well, thus does not commute. You could say for a free particle everything commutes however in a universe with only a single particle I am not sure such a term as position would even exist as it is a relative term.

Thanks for replay,LostConjugate. I am very interested in what you said free particle's all operators commute, would you please explain it more? Thanks
 
Actually it still does not commute with position. A free particle's energy only depends on the momentum and not the position because it is in a universe where there are no other forces. So the total energy would commute with the momentum.
 
luxiaolei said:
and they all form uncertainty relations??


This is true.
 
luxiaolei said:
Hi,all, I am wondering, momentum can expressed as energy, so:

dxdP can expresses as dxdE ?

then position, momentum, energy,time are all related, and they all form uncertainty relations??

in the view of commute the operators, all these four operators can NOT commute??

where am I wrong?

Thanks in advance!

It is true that in classical mechanics, kinetic energy can be expressed in terms of the momentum as p2/2m. However, in QM, momentum is an operator, so you need to be a little more careful. You can construct the analogous kinetic energy operator as:

\hat{K}=\frac{\hat{p}^{2}}{2m}=-\frac{\hbar^{2}}{2m}\nabla^{2}

Also, you seem to be neglecting potential energy in your question, V(x), which is in turn a function of position. The total energy is of course always the sum of the kinetic and potential energies.

To answer your question, the following pairs of operators commute:

1) momentum and kinetic energy
2) position and potential energy

The following pairs of operators never commute:
1) momentum and position
2) kinetic energy and position

The following pairs of operators do not commute in general, but can in special cases (like the free particle, where V=0):
1) momentum and potential energy
2) kinetic energy and potential energy

HTH
 
LostConjugate:
right, start to make sense now, thanks a lot. so it comes an conclusion:
if precisely measure time then enlarger E and P, then result in precise the position, am I right? position and time, if measure one of them precisely, the other one will locate precisely automatically?
 
Better answer Cat :) The way I always remember it is that you can't have an exact position if you have a momentum. Simply because momentum is dx/dt and an exact position would require dx = 0. Therefore... uncertainty existed far before QM.

Since E = p = x/t everything is uncertain.
 
luxiaolei said:
LostConjugate:
right, start to make sense now, thanks a lot. so it comes an conclusion:
if precisely measure time then enlarger E and P, then result in precise the position, am I right? position and time, if measure one of them precisely, the other one will locate precisely automatically?

If you measures position to an exact measurement you will no longer be able to measures momentum, because dx = 0 and p = dx/dt (or in QM d^2/dx^2) so now how to you calculate that?

Same goes for measuring momentum, you will no longer get an exact position, it is either one or the other.
 
  • #10
LostConjugate said:
If you measures position to an exact measurement you will no longer be able to measures momentum, because dx = 0 and p = dx/dt (or in QM d^2/dx^2) so now how to you calculate that?

Same goes for measuring momentum, you will no longer get an exact position, it is either one or the other.

@luxiaoloei: This is the whole reason that QM is probablilstic and not deterministic... we can't ignore that. If not, why \Psi ? right?
 
  • #11
Thanks all! :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
855
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K