Wave Particle Duality: Exploring Wave Lengths & Objects

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of wave-particle duality, which is used to explain electromagnetic radiation to laymen but is not a part of any formal physical theory. It is also mentioned that quantum objects can be described using both wave and particle characteristics, and the scientist must choose which model to use in specific instances. The conversation also touches on the minimum size and wavelength in the universe, with the conclusion that the wavelength of a baseball is too small to be significant.
  • #1
ArielGenesis
239
0
I just learned formally about wave particle duality in the class today.

wave length = plank's constant/momentum

my teacher said that every moving object has a wave properties with wave length as described. So a baseball flying in a game would have a wave length of about 10^-30. Is it true and, does every wave also have an object in resembelence or only electromagnetic one.

Sorry for my poor english and thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Oh no, not this subject again. Asking such question in here will (probably) lead to a dispute from which no clear conclusion can be drawn.

Here i go: there's no such thing as "wave-particle duality". It isn't part of any formalism of any possible physical theory, at least accepted theories.


Daniel.
 
  • #3
Well, then can someone at least summarze for me what is the current well accepted theory and their counter-argument.

Its like i had missed a whole lot of hot discussions since I left the forum about a year ago...
 
  • #4
Here's my take. entities described by quantum mechanics are neither particles nor waves. There is no classical object to make a comparison with and this leads to a lot of confusion. The quantum objects can be labeled with things like momenta and wavelength, and one can go back and forth between the two via planks constant but reconciling an EM wave and a photon is still tough. Think of the two pictures (particle and wave) as separate models. In certain circumstances one is closer to reality than the other, but neither accurately describes reality. Its up to the scientist to choose which to use in specefic instances.

One "law" that you can keep in mind is that quantum objects travel as waves (or with the wave characteristics of a quantum object dominant) and interact as particles (or with the particle characteristics of a quantum object dominant)
 
  • #5
The reason it is silly to talk about the wavelength of of a baseball is that (these clowns) assert that it is a trillion times smaller then minimum length that the (currently) most precise measurements can detect.
 
  • #6
Crosson said:
The reason it is silly to talk about the wavelength of of a baseball is that (these clowns) assert that it is a trillion times smaller then minimum length that the (currently) most precise measurements can detect.
I really don't follow you.
So because we cannot detect it with our instruments it is silly to talk about it, and those who do ought to be called clowns? :confused:
That sounds like anti-science to me.
 
  • #7
I have a similar question along this line. If I remember correctly there is a minimum size in the universe, which also leads to a minimum wave length. I remember it being derived from plank's constant. Anyways if there is a minimum wave length then this would seem to presume a maximum size or at least tend to say that not all objects have 1 wave length but instead be some sort of sum of the wavelengths of the system that makes the ball?
 
  • #8
Allday said:
Here's my take. entities described by quantum mechanics are neither particles nor waves. There is no classical object to make a comparison with and this leads to a lot of confusion. The quantum objects can be labeled with things like momenta and wavelength, and one can go back and forth between the two via planks constant but reconciling an EM wave and a photon is still tough. Think of the two pictures (particle and wave) as separate models. In certain circumstances one is closer to reality than the other, but neither accurately describes reality. Its up to the scientist to choose which to use in specefic instances.

One "law" that you can keep in mind is that quantum objects travel as waves (or with the wave characteristics of a quantum object dominant) and interact as particles (or with the particle characteristics of a quantum object dominant)

Wave-particle duality is basically only used to explain electromagnetic radiation to laymen. Modern scientists do not shift back and forth between the models as light has one description within quantum mechanics.

The so called "law" you stated may be useful to laymen, but yet again, quantum physics does not separate light into several models depending on the situation to my knowledge.

The wavelength of a baseball is much too small compared to its size that it is silly to take it into account. For an electron, however, the size is much closer to its quantum mechanical wavelength and as a result, one needs to take it into account in areas such as why electrons does not crash into the nucleus of an atom.

I believe that both the wave-particle phenomena and why electrons does not crash into the nucleus is covered in a sticky in general physics.
 

What is wave-particle duality?

Wave-particle duality is the concept in quantum physics that states that all particles have both wave-like and particle-like properties. This means that they can behave like waves in some experiments and like particles in others.

How was wave-particle duality discovered?

Wave-particle duality was first discovered through the famous double-slit experiment conducted by Thomas Young in the early 1800s. This experiment showed that light could behave as both a wave and a particle, depending on how it was observed.

What is the relationship between wavelength and objects?

The relationship between wavelength and objects is that the wavelength of a particle or object is inversely proportional to its momentum. This means that objects with smaller wavelengths have a higher momentum and vice versa.

Are there any real-life applications of wave-particle duality?

Yes, there are several real-life applications of wave-particle duality. One example is in the development of technology such as electron microscopes, which use the wave-like properties of electrons to image objects at a much smaller scale than traditional microscopes.

What are some common misconceptions about wave-particle duality?

One common misconception is that wave-particle duality means that particles can be in two places at once. In reality, it is the probability of a particle's location that is spread out, not the particle itself. Another misconception is that wave-particle duality only applies to light, when in fact it applies to all particles, including electrons and atoms.

Similar threads

  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
38
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top