Wave-Particle Duality and Particle Specific Identification

ir316507
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have been struggling with one simple question. How can one measure the momentum of a particle within a field without disrupting the entire field, all together? If the particle is under observation at at t_0, how is it verifiable that at t_1 the same particle is being observed? Obviously spin and the state of the field can be determined in certain instances, but is it presumptuous to assume that the observed particles are identical?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Of course you can't say anything about a particle when its not observed. When you observe it next who knows if its the same particle or what it is. QM is silent about any of that. But why make life hard for yourself and the world weirder than it has to be. Its easiest assuming its the same particle so simply do that.

If you are just starting out in QM I suggest the following:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0473179768/?tag=pfamazon01-20

QM is in fact an approximation to a deeper theory called Quantum Field Theory. By treating everything as a field a number of conceptual issues disappear and is how I suggest you start out. The above book is quite good and unique in its approach. Although some comments he makes about Feynman are off the mark. He attributes Feynman's comment about the shell game played with field theory to field theory itself - it wasn't - it was with regard to renormalisation which has now been resolved through the work of Wilson and others on effective field theory.

Thanks
Bill
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks Bill

I am somewhat new to the concepts, so it would be ideal for me to gain a better understanding. I am an applied mathematics major with possible interests in multivariate public key cryptography. I noticed "spin" seems to be the central focus of the available research.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We often see discussions about what QM and QFT mean, but hardly anything on just how fundamental they are to much of physics. To rectify that, see the following; https://www.cambridge.org/engage/api-gateway/coe/assets/orp/resource/item/66a6a6005101a2ffa86cdd48/original/a-derivation-of-maxwell-s-equations-from-first-principles.pdf 'Somewhat magically, if one then applies local gauge invariance to the Dirac Lagrangian, a field appears, and from this field it is possible to derive Maxwell’s...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top