Re: QM Measurement Problem
- From: Doug Sweetser <dougsweetser@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 00:06:34 +0000 (UTC)
Hello Salviati:
Mathematicians would 'correct' me: The set of reals is uncountable. I am
arguing: Each single irrational number can be thought to be indefinitely
long. And I add: Uncertainty of a pair of conjugate variables originates
there.
The math sounds right, the application to physics does not. The
reason is that any single measurement has this property, even
measurements made for classical systems. The proof of the uncertainty
principle I saw has to do with the properties of complex numbers, not
the properties of the reals to which you referred. I recall reading
in a book by Stephen Adler that the quantum numbers done over the
field of real numbers would be quite dull, no quantum interference.
Doug
.
- References:
- QM Measurement Problem
- From: Martin Hogbin
- Re: QM Measurement Problem
- From: Doug Sweetser
- Re: QM Measurement Problem
- From: Doug Sweetser
- Re: QM Measurement Problem
- From: Salviati
- QM Measurement Problem
- Prev by Date: Re: Hawton Position Operator. (Was: EM field of photon)
- Next by Date: Re: Gravity at the Molecular Level
- Previous by thread: Re: QM Measurement Problem
- Next by thread: Re: QM Measurement Problem
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
