Re: Heisenberg uncertainty principle meanings
From: zigoteau (zigoteau_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 09/22/04
- Next message: Randy Poe: "Re: The Paradox No Relativist Can Weasel Out Of"
- Previous message: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: Where all the physical laws in place before the Big Bang occured?"
- In reply to: Old Man: "Re: Heisenberg uncertainty principle meanings"
- Next in thread: Edward Green: "Re: Heisenberg uncertainty principle meanings"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 22 Sep 2004 02:31:33 -0700
"Old Man" <nomail@nomail.net> wrote in message news:<_dmdnTHwfI8lKM3cRVn-uQ@prairiewave.com>...
Hi, Old Man,
> > > That Planck's constant and the HUP are intrinsic to Nature
> > > is made evident by setting H = constant whereof causality
> > > is then completely absent. HUP interferes with the results
> > > of an observation but is not a result of that observation.
> >
> > ??? But h *is* constant. I do not follow your argument here at all.
>
> As is conventional, "H" is the Hamiltonian, whilst "h"
> is Planck's constant. H = constant WRT position and
> time signifies the absence of interactions or observations
> whereof the intrinsic nature of HUP is unambiguous.
That interpretation struck me on rereading your post, but I still
don't think it makes any sense. Schrödinger's equation is written
either as
H.psi = E.psi
or, equivalently, since energy is conjugate to time,
H.psi = hbar.(d/dt)psi
In a system which can be considered for all intents and purposes to
obey Schrödinger's equation, what does it mean to put H=C? This
additional constraint is not imposed by any natural boundary
condition. If anything, it means that you are only interested in
solutions with a definite value of energy C. What has this got to do
with causality in the system? To demonstrate causality, the cause
cannot be present for all time, so of necessity it can only be
demonstrated in systems where H does not commute with d/dt, and which
therefore are not guaranteed to have constant-energy solutions.
> Thus, HUP interferes with the results of an observation
> but is not a result of that observation.
"signifies" "whereof" "intrinsic nature" "unambiguous" "interferes
with" . . . who did you say was playing with words?
Cheers,
Zigoteau
- Next message: Randy Poe: "Re: The Paradox No Relativist Can Weasel Out Of"
- Previous message: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: Where all the physical laws in place before the Big Bang occured?"
- In reply to: Old Man: "Re: Heisenberg uncertainty principle meanings"
- Next in thread: Edward Green: "Re: Heisenberg uncertainty principle meanings"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|