B Energy-time uncertainty relation for a volume and macroscopic objects?

Aidyan
Messages
182
Reaction score
14
As I understand it, the energy-time uncertainty relation \triangle E \triangle t \geq \hbar /2 expresses a trade-off between the precision with which energy and time can be simultaneously measured. I understand that, unlike position and momentum, time is not an operator, so the relation is not a formal uncertainty between two observables. Instead, it reflects the idea that the shorter the duration \triangle t over which a quantum state exists, the more uncertain is its energy \triangle E. For example, it underlies the phenomenon of the broadening of spectral lines.
I'm wondering whether it can be applied to a volume of space, where the time interval is related to a length L divided to the speed of light c as: \triangle t=\frac{L}{c}. Then \triangle E \geq \frac{\hbar}{2 \triangle t}=\frac{\hbar c}{2 L}=\frac{\hbar c}{2 V^{1/3}}. If so, can this be applied to macroscopic objects occupying a volume V? Does this make sense? If not, why not?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Aidyan said:
As I understand it, the energy-time uncertainty relation \triangle E \triangle t \geq \hbar /2 expresses a trade-off between the precision with which energy and time can be simultaneously measured.
It's nothing like that. Time is not an observable in QM; it's an independent variable, unrelated to the particle itself (unlike the position of the particle). In any case, Griffiths deals with this common misunderstanding in his Introduction to Quantum Mechanics. See section 3.5.3:

##\Delta t## in the energy-time uncertainty principle is not the standard deviation of a collection of time measurements. Roughly speaking, it's the time it takes the system to change substantially.

He then goes on to make this more precise.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta Prime
I read Hanbury Brown and Twiss's experiment is using one beam but split into two to test their correlation. It said the traditional correlation test were using two beams........ This confused me, sorry. All the correlation tests I learnt such as Stern-Gerlash are using one beam? (Sorry if I am wrong) I was also told traditional interferometers are concerning about amplitude but Hanbury Brown and Twiss were concerning about intensity? Isn't the square of amplitude is the intensity? Please...
I am not sure if this belongs in the biology section, but it appears more of a quantum physics question. Mike Wiest, Associate Professor of Neuroscience at Wellesley College in the US. In 2024 he published the results of an experiment on anaesthesia which purported to point to a role of quantum processes in consciousness; here is a popular exposition: https://neurosciencenews.com/quantum-process-consciousness-27624/ As my expertise in neuroscience doesn't reach up to an ant's ear...
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
Back
Top