Uncertainty Principle: Misconceptions & Justifications

In summary, the textbook cites an argument that says the typical momentum is of that order of magnitude, but does not provide a rigorous derivation.
  • #1
tommy01
40
0
Hi together ...

In many textbooks on particle physics i encounter - at least in my mind - a misuse of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
For completeness we talk about
[tex]\Delta p \Delta x \geq \hbar/2 [/tex]

For example they state that the size of an atom is of the order of a few Angstroms. Therefore [tex]\Delta x[/tex] of an Electron is [tex]\approx 10^{-10}m[/tex] then the conclude that the momentum is [tex]\approx \hbar/\Delta x[/tex].

But what justifies this? The only thing you get is [tex]\Delta p[/tex] this means the momentum is about [tex]p \pm \Delta p[/tex] how one can conclude from the uncertainty of an observable its mean value?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You choose a frame where mean value is zero.
 
  • #3
They conclude that the momentum of the electron is [tex] \approx \hbar/\Delta x [/tex], so it surely isn't zero. They want to calculate the typical momentum of an electron in an atom, it would not be very helpful to chooce such a reference frame, because the answer would be that the typical momentum is zero.
It is cited in many textbooks. I just read in in aitchison, hey - gauge theories in particle physics. vol. 1 p.8.
 
  • #4
Sorry for bumping, but i can't believe that nobody who did some lectures on particle physics ever encountered this (or a similar misuse of the uncertainty principle) problem. I would be very glad for an answer.

Greetings.
 
  • #5
Do you have a link to such an argument in an online reference? I don't recall seeing this argument.
 
  • #6
tommy01 said:
Sorry for bumping, but i can't believe that nobody who did some lectures on particle physics ever encountered this (or a similar misuse of the uncertainty principle) problem. I would be very glad for an answer.
Are they actually saying that the expected value of the momentum is of that order of magnitude? It seems valid to say e.g. that a typical momentum is of that order, or that the expected magnitude of the momentum is of that order.
 
  • #7
They say:

"The uncertainty principle gives an estimate for the typical electron momenta when they are confined to such a linear domain." Then they give the above formula.

But all they get from the uncertainty principle is the uncertainty [tex]\Delta p[/tex] which is not the typical momentum. In my mind the typical momentum should be the same as the expected momentum or at least the same order of magnitude.

Greetings.
 
  • #8
tommy01 said:
They say:

"The uncertainty principle gives an estimate for the typical electron momenta when they are confined to such a linear domain." Then they give the above formula.

But all they get from the uncertainty principle is the uncertainty [tex]\Delta p[/tex] which is not the typical momentum. In my mind the typical momentum should be the same as the expected momentum or at least the same order of magnitude.

The uncertainty is a lower bound on the standard deviation of multiple observations of
a quantity. So different observations typically differ by about this much. Even when the expected value is zero, one can conclude that many observations will have this magnitude. if the expectation value is nozero, then even more.

Thus it is appropriate to regard the uncertainty as a lower bound for the order of magnitude of a typical momentum.
 
  • #9
Thanks, but i think it's meaningless to give a lower bound and speak of typical momenta.
The uncertainty can be a very small fraction of the actual momentum or vice versa, so i can't believe they meant it this way.
 
  • #10
tommy01 said:
Thanks, but i think it's meaningless to give a lower bound and speak of typical momenta.
The uncertainty can be a very small fraction of the actual momentum or vice versa, so i can't believe they meant it this way.

If it is a very small fraction of the actual momentum, it is a lower bound, though a poor one. On the other hand, ''vice versa'' is very unlikely -- Look at a Gaussian random number generator and observe how long it takes until a realization is much smaller in magnitude than the standard deviation!
 
  • #11
Thanks again. But that's what i meant.
It is unlikely but not impossible. And a very poor lower bound doesn't justify to call [tex]\Delta p[/tex] the typical momentum.
It seems as if one could conclude the mean value (which i assume is the typical value) from the standard deviation. But there's no justification in statistics for this. Isn't it?
 
  • #12
Note that they are talking about the momentum for a confined electron. Hence, classically the mean momentum would be zero (since it is not moving) but here the momentum is -of the order of magnitude- h/dx.
This is obviously not a rigorous derivation; but using the UP in this way is not wrong as such (I do it all the time) and is very often useful as a first approximation (and occasionally it will even be exact).
 
  • #13
tommy01 said:
Thanks again. But that's what i meant.
It is unlikely but not impossible. And a very poor lower bound doesn't justify to call [tex]\Delta p[/tex] the typical momentum. It seems as if one could conclude the mean value (which i assume is the typical value) from the standard deviation. But there's no justification in statistics for this. Isn't it?
Look at the definition of "standard deviation". It's a measure of how much a measurement result will typically deviate from the mean, which in this case is obviously zero.
 
  • #14
A simple suggestion to you tommy01.
Use H. A. Robertsons method to calculate the uncertainity product for electron in H-atom compare it with lower bower uncertainity product.
If still unsatisfied consult an expert like A. Neumaier (he will surely help)
 

FAQ: Uncertainty Principle: Misconceptions & Justifications

What is the Uncertainty Principle?

The Uncertainty Principle, also known as Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, is a principle in quantum mechanics that states that it is impossible to simultaneously know the exact position and momentum of a particle with absolute certainty. This principle was developed by German physicist Werner Heisenberg in the 1920s and has been an important concept in understanding the behavior of particles in the subatomic world.

What are some common misconceptions about the Uncertainty Principle?

One common misconception about the Uncertainty Principle is that it is a limitation of measurement tools or techniques. In reality, the principle is a fundamental property of the universe and cannot be overcome by improving measurement methods. Another misconception is that the principle only applies to particles, when in fact it applies to all physical systems.

How is the Uncertainty Principle justified?

The Uncertainty Principle is justified through mathematical equations and experimental evidence. Heisenberg derived the principle using matrix mechanics, a mathematical framework for describing the behavior of quantum systems. Additionally, numerous experiments have been conducted that have confirmed the predictions of the Uncertainty Principle.

Does the Uncertainty Principle violate the laws of classical physics?

No, the Uncertainty Principle does not violate the laws of classical physics. It is a fundamental principle of quantum mechanics, which operates at the subatomic level and has different laws and behaviors than classical physics. The Uncertainty Principle is not applicable to macroscopic objects and does not contradict the laws of classical physics.

How does the Uncertainty Principle affect our daily lives?

The Uncertainty Principle has very little impact on our daily lives because it applies to the behavior of particles at the subatomic level. However, it has had a profound impact on the fields of physics and technology, allowing for the development of technologies such as semiconductors, transistors, and lasers. It also plays a crucial role in understanding the behavior of atoms and molecules, which are the building blocks of our physical world.

Back
Top