Variable pairs in uncertainty relation?

Nemus
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I have been trying to figure out other pairs of variables in Heisenberg's uncertainty relationship apart from the well known position-momentum and time-energy pairs.
I am particularly interested in electric fireld strength and magnetic field strenght.
The reason for my interest is that if I figure this out (or somebody tells me), then there would be a way to calculate how the correlation between two initially spin correlated particles decays as they move apart. You know, if there is a certain level of fluctuations in the magnetic field even in a perfect vaccuum, the famous spooky-action-at-adistance would at least have a distance limit.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Charge-phase is a conjugate pair, not quite E and B but at least related quantities.

Btw, time and energy is not a "real" pair; time is not an observable in QM.
 
Nemus said:
I have been trying to figure out other pairs of variables in Heisenberg's uncertainty relationship apart from the well known position-momentum and time-energy pairs.
I am particularly interested in electric fireld strength and magnetic field strenght.
The reason for my interest is that if I figure this out (or somebody tells me), then there would be a way to calculate how the correlation between two initially spin correlated particles decays as they move apart. You know, if there is a certain level of fluctuations in the magnetic field even in a perfect vaccuum, the famous spooky-action-at-adistance would at least have a distance limit.

The projections of angular momentum on different spatial axes also do not commute. This is the basis of the triple Stern-Gerlach experiment.
 
Phase of what?

You are of course correct that the energy-time pair is different. Very useful though.
 
Nemus said:
Phase of what?

It depends. In most experiments one uses the phase of e.g. a superconducting junction (known as a Josephson junction) or a ring. Google "Phase qubit".
 
Not an expert in QM. AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is quite different from the classical wave equation. The former is an equation for the dynamics of the state of a (quantum?) system, the latter is an equation for the dynamics of a (classical) degree of freedom. As a matter of fact, Schrödinger's equation is first order in time derivatives, while the classical wave equation is second order. But, AFAIK, Schrödinger's equation is a wave equation; only its interpretation makes it non-classical...
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
Is it possible, and fruitful, to use certain conceptual and technical tools from effective field theory (coarse-graining/integrating-out, power-counting, matching, RG) to think about the relationship between the fundamental (quantum) and the emergent (classical), both to account for the quasi-autonomy of the classical level and to quantify residual quantum corrections? By “emergent,” I mean the following: after integrating out fast/irrelevant quantum degrees of freedom (high-energy modes...
Back
Top