- #1

- 106

- 0

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter mahela007
- Start date

- #1

- 106

- 0

- #2

- 970

- 3

Well if we gave it a definite position, then it wouldn't really be a wave?

- #3

- 472

- 1

Try to imagine (classically) the speed of an electron around a nucleus. Now to find out precisely the position of the electron, you would need to know so many different parameters at the same time, that it becomes physically impossible to do so.

From the Heisenberg uncertainty,[tex]\Delta x \times \Delta p \geq \frac{h}{2}[/tex] fixes the precision of the position. If you decide to be super-duper precise on the position, then you have absolutely no-more clue about it speed. Therefore, you will not be able to keep track for very long of the "exact" position.

Cheers

- #4

- 9

- 0

As fatra2 states, it has to do with the Heisenberg uncertainty.

Without diving into the math, you could say that it is simply a result of the formulation of QM, which leads to the question of "How fast was the electron going when it was at x" becoming utter nonsense. It's kinda like the joke

"If it takes two men two hours to dig a hole, then how long would it take one man to dig half a hole?"

Per definition, there is no such thing as half a hole, therefore the question makes no sense. Similarly in QM where you describe an electron with a wavefunction, there is no such thing as a simultaneous position and velocity (or energy).

- #5

- 189

- 0

Unless we make new theory replacing the Schrodinger equation, all we can do is only believing the uncertainty principle. (even if the uncertainty principle seems strange to us.)

Some people may dream of treating the electrons as real particles based on the Schrodinger equation, but these methods won't work.

If we try to treat the electrons as real particles (with definite momentum and position),

we must forget the idea of the Schrodinger equation.

At first Schrodinger thought that the electron is wave (and a particle).

But the wave packets will be spreading in all space with time (this means the electron will become bigger and bigger with time.)

So, later he changed his idea, and he thought the wave(function) means the probability density

of the electron.

Last edited:

- #6

- 1,851

- 7

- #7

- 106

- 0

So let me sum up to see if I got it right.

The electron is buzzing around and we have no way of predicting where it will be because of a fundamental law of nature (the uncertainty principle). The electron can be at any place given by it's wave function... (right?)

One final question:

Although we can't exactly "find" the electron, does it have a position in space? Logically, it seems that it should. (my

- #8

- 246

- 6

So let me sum up to see if I got it right.

The electron is buzzing around and we have no way of predicting where it will be because of a fundamental law of nature (the uncertainty principle). The electron can be at any place given by it's wave function... (right?)

One final question:

Although we can't exactly "find" the electron, does it have a position in space? Logically, it seems that it should. (mylogichas been known to be faulty.)

I think it is more along the lines of this:

We

In fact, it is important to keep in mind that electrons have discreet energy levels, which is especially relevant when they are bound to an orbital around a nucleus.

- #9

- 106

- 0

I think it is more along the lines of this:

"but it does not actually occupy that "location" until we measure the position (collapsing the probability wave)." .

But the instant we look at the electron, it's path is disturbed...

thanks .. I think I'm getting to understand what all this is..

However, I won't mark this thread as solved just yet. If anyone else has any ideas, please post them here...

Last edited:

Share:

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 7K