SRL Archive - Science

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SjFJImg2Z8

That's pretty wild stuff huh?

loved physics at college :)

The book is quite a good read. Read it to write a book report for physics and was actually a book report I enjoyed doing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOYyCHGWJq4

There are infinite results of this problem: There are more than "dead" or "alive" in "real" quantum physics.
This leads to this one:

-> Heisenberg uncertainty principle

This is the equation:

All it says, is that you can't get the impulse and the position of electrons at the same time. You just can give a possible "room" where it is -> "blurred" position or a blurred impulse.
Just in case someone is interested in :P

(correct me if I am wrong)

From: Gala
There are infinite results of this problem: There are more than "dead" or "alive" in "real" quantum physics.
This leads to this one:

-> Heisenberg uncertainty principle

This is the equation:

All it says, is that you can't get the impulse and the position of electrons at the same time. You just can give a possible "room" where it is -> "blurred" position or a blurred impulse.
Just in case someone is interested in :P

(correct me if I am wrong)

The uncertainty principle can be solved to within a determined percentage now. However, this is only used, afaik, at CERN and leading research facilities. It usually yields an error in femto or pico units.
thus allowing one to solve for both position and velocity as a function of time :)

But this seems to be a function for the "blurred" position of the "blurred" impulse.
This is what the uncertainty principle says: You can get the solution with a given percentage, but it is impossible to solve it for both, isn't it? (both exactly)

Edit: Aren't even errors in femto and pico units big enough to destroy such experiments in CERN?

From: Gala
But this seems to be a function for the "blurred" position of the "blurred" impulse.
This is what the uncertainty principle says: You can get the solution with a given percentage, but it is impossible to solve it for both, isn't it? (both exactly)

Edit: Aren't even errors in femto and pico units big enough to destroy such experiments in CERN?

I've visited CERN multiple times for some of my doctoral studies and they generally strive for an error in attometers. This is because their best guess at the diameter of a proton is about .8 fm. (Yes, I know protons aren't spherical.) At the LHC, they consider an error in units of am to ym acceptable due to the relative size of the proton. So, you can't necessarily find the Exact measurements, but you can find the position to within Less than One diameter of a proton.. Very astounding if you ask me. It may eventually be possible to solve a problem like this to a 100% degree of accuracy.

As for the OP, i think you should check out consistent histories. (coherent with the Schrodinger Eq.)

Ok, I thought even this were not accurate enough.

But the equation you posted above is just the uncertainty principle just with an other constant.(h->h/2Pi)
I thought this was the principle on what the whole quantum physics theory is based on. Isn't it a kind of "axiom" that you can't get the exact position and the exact impulse (velocity) for the same t of an electron?