What Does It Mean Particles Only Have Location if Measured?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kyphysics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mean Particles
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Quantum particles do not possess a defined location until they are measured, a principle rooted in the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. Measurement involves placing a detector in a random location; if the detector activates, information about the particle's position is obtained. This process is analogous to locating an object, such as an Easter egg, based on prior knowledge or assumptions about its existence. The absence of a measurable position does not imply that the particle does not exist; rather, existence is an underlying assumption in quantum mechanics.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, specifically the Copenhagen interpretation
  • Familiarity with measurement theory in physics
  • Basic knowledge of particle physics and quantum particles
  • Concept of wave-particle duality
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics
  • Explore measurement theory and its implications in quantum physics
  • Study alternative interpretations of quantum mechanics, such as Many-Worlds or Pilot-Wave theory
  • Investigate practical applications of quantum measurement techniques
USEFUL FOR

Physics enthusiasts, students studying quantum mechanics, and anyone interested in the philosophical implications of measurement in quantum theory.

kyphysics
Messages
686
Reaction score
446
I'm not a physics person (just an interested layperson) and have read that quantum particles don't have any location until they are measured. First, is this true? And, if so, what does that mean? For example, if you don't know where a particle exists, then how can you even measure it? And what does it mean they don't normally have location? If not, how do you know they even exist at all?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What Does It Mean Particles Only Have Location if Measured?
... the concept of "position" only makes sense if the position has been detected.

if you don't know where a particle exists, then how can you even measure it?
... you put a detector in a random location. If it goes off, then you have just measured stuff about the particle. If it doesn't - then you have some other knowledge about the particle (i.e. it wasn't there) ... you never been on a treasure hunt? How do you locate an easter egg that is hidden?

Think how you normally measure the position of something. You start out with some idea about where it is ... say you saw it with your eyes. The act of seeing it with your eyes makes a measurement of the position. Then you break out a ruler of some kind and make a more precise measurement.
It is the same with particles - before conducting an experiment we prefer to have a good reason to believe there is something to measure... like we just shone a laser thataway ... this gives us a rough idea where to look for photons so we can make more precise measurements.

And what does it mean they don't normally have location? If not, how do you know they even exist at all?
If you don't know where the particle is, you are still presupposing it's existence. It's existence is an axiom of the problem. No point doing the math for particles that don't exist.
Not having a position is not the same as nonexistence.

 
I just want to add that this statement is valid in the Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Other interpretations may not agree.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K