Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
wave-particle_duality [2021/02/08 20:33] – [Quantum Particles] adminwave-particle_duality [2022/09/06 18:08] (current) – [Quantum Particles] admin
Line 83: Line 83:
 We observe a wave-like interference between the two possible trajectories //only// if we cannot tell which trajectory was actually taken.  Otherwise, we observe particle like properties, with no interference patter. We observe a wave-like interference between the two possible trajectories //only// if we cannot tell which trajectory was actually taken.  Otherwise, we observe particle like properties, with no interference patter.
  
-Niels Bohr introduced the principle of //**complementarity**/// to describe this:  We need both particle and wave concepts to describe quantum systems, but we can only ever observe one of them at a time, depending on the experimental arrangement.  It is not a case of either/or or both/and.  They are complementary aspects of the same physical system.+Niels Bohr introduced the principle of //**complementarity**// to describe this:  We need both particle and wave concepts to describe quantum systems, but we can only ever observe one of them at a time, depending on the experimental arrangement.  It is not a case of either/or or both/and.  They are complementary aspects of the same physical system.
  
 Bohr, along with many physicists, would say that it is meaningless to ask which trajectory a quantum particle takes when we are observing an interference pattern.  Since you cannot observe the trajectory at the same time as observing the interference, it simply does not have a trajectory.  Note that in popular science accounts, it is often said that the particle travels along //both// trajectories.  But the conventional view is not //both//, not //either/or//, and not //neither//, but that the particle is in a new kind of physical state where the question itself is meaningless. Bohr, along with many physicists, would say that it is meaningless to ask which trajectory a quantum particle takes when we are observing an interference pattern.  Since you cannot observe the trajectory at the same time as observing the interference, it simply does not have a trajectory.  Note that in popular science accounts, it is often said that the particle travels along //both// trajectories.  But the conventional view is not //both//, not //either/or//, and not //neither//, but that the particle is in a new kind of physical state where the question itself is meaningless.
Line 99: Line 99:
  
 The superposition principle is responsible for the wave-like interference effects we have been discussing.  It holds because the equation of motion of quantum mechanics (the Schrödinger equation) is a linear, homogeneous differential equation, just like the wave equation in classical physics. The superposition principle is responsible for the wave-like interference effects we have been discussing.  It holds because the equation of motion of quantum mechanics (the Schrödinger equation) is a linear, homogeneous differential equation, just like the wave equation in classical physics.
 +
 +{{:question-mark.png?direct&50|}}
 +====== In Class Activity ======
 +  - In light of the double slit experiment, many physicists are inclined to say either:
 +    * Only the wavefunction exists.  Other properties only come into existence when observed.
 +    * Nothing exists until observed.
 +
 +Consider the experiment depicted below.
 +{{ :einsteinsscreen.png?direct&600 |}}
 +
 +In this experiment, which principle of physics would be violated by the "only the wavefunction" or "nothing exists" points of view?
 +