Wave-Particle Duality: Photons, Electrons & Heisenberg's Uncertainty

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the wave-particle duality of photons and electrons, exploring their classification as either waves or particles, and the implications of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. Participants examine theoretical and conceptual aspects, as well as experimental evidence related to this duality.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that photons and electrons exhibit both wave-like and particle-like characteristics, leading to questions about their proper classification.
  • One participant suggests that the term "quantum particles" is more appropriate than "classical particles," emphasizing the differences between the two.
  • A humorous suggestion of the term "warticle" is introduced to describe the dual nature of these entities.
  • Another participant mentions the DeBroglie pilot wave theory, linking it to the uncertainty principle and discussing the probabilistic nature of quantum entities.
  • One participant visualizes photons as "packets" containing wave properties, suggesting that many such packets can form a continuous wave when combined.
  • The uncertainty principle is discussed in relation to Fourier theory, highlighting the mathematical constraints it imposes on wave properties and momentum.
  • Some participants argue that, in practical terms, particles like electrons and photons are detected as particles, while their wave-like properties are tied to their probability structure.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the classification of photons and electrons, with no consensus reached on whether they should be considered waves, particles, or a combination of both. The application of the uncertainty principle is acknowledged but remains a point of discussion without resolution.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various interpretations of wave-particle duality and the uncertainty principle, with some participants referencing external sources for further reading. There are unresolved aspects regarding the definitions and implications of these concepts.

SpaceExplorer
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
Photons are always called 'particles'. But through many experiments (by scientists such as Geoffrey Taylor), it has been found that photons show some strange characteristics which resemble those of waves. In fact scientists also reveal that electrons also show wave-like nature(in fact they have frequencies). So what can we call them-waves or particles? Or none of them? And how is the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle applicable here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
"Particles" is the appropriate word, but these are quantum particles, not classical particles. A classical particle can be thought of as small massive spheres, but quantum particles can't. If you're interested in how they are different, I can recommend the book "QED: The strange theory of light and matter", by Richard Feynman. It's a short book that doesn't use mathematics.
 
Personally I prefer the term "warticle" ;p
 
some think its particles guided by pilot waves (DeBroglie). Heisenberg's uncertainty principle applies because quantum entities are expressed by probabilities, and these probabilities have standard deviations, and it is the product of the standard deviation in momentum times that of position that has a bound defined by heisenburgs principle. typically wavelike entities have better defined momentum because the DeBroglie wavelength is what shrodinger used to motivate his equation (i think).

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-bohm/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle
 
I sometimes used to picture them like packets, like a tiny box with a piece of wave inside, a space-limited (and time-limited) wave impulse.

If you imagine each of them like in the attached picture then each is "space-confined", but many of them together forming a beam can be seen as a continuous wave (because the envelope is a piece of squared cosine, if you put many of them one after the other in the proper position and sum them all you should get a constant envelope).
 

Attachments

  • pw.JPG
    pw.JPG
    4.2 KB · Views: 454
Last edited:
SpaceExplorer said:
Photons are always called 'particles'. But through many experiments (by scientists such as Geoffrey Taylor), it has been found that photons show some strange characteristics which resemble those of waves. In fact scientists also reveal that electrons also show wave-like nature(in fact they have frequencies). So what can we call them-waves or particles? Or none of them? And how is the Heisenberg's uncertainty principle applicable here?
Some people use the term wavicle.

Pete
 
The uncertainty principle is, in fact, linked to Fourier theory. It is a principle of the Fourier transform of all signals (waves) that the time duration and temporal bandwidth product is limited to:

[tex]\Delta t \Delta \nu = 1[/tex]

Further, the spatial frequency k is propotional to the momentum of the "wavicle" (with a constant 1/h-bar). So, we find that the width of the wavicle is constrained to:

[tex]\Delta x \Delta p = hbar[/tex]

So the link between the uncertainty principle and the wave property of matter is mathematical in nature. The wave property of matter, on the other hand, requires experimental evidence.

For reading, google for "bandwidth time product". The Stanford Exploration Project has nice slides.
 
For the most part, electrons, photons, baryons and so on are detected as if they are particles, like very small ones. That's how the theory treats them. It is the probability structure that has wave-like properties. At a practical level, electrons and their associates are particles; not waves. Think of water molecules in surface water waves as a good and illuminating example.
Regards,
Reilly Atkinson
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
9K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
6K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
9K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K