|
Dual observation
|
| Perhaps I should simply put "not an expert" in my signature to save time. At any rate, here's my question. Theoretically, if you are observing an electron, you can only observe one given property at one time. For instance, you can observe its spin or its velocity, but not both; you have to obscure one of them to sharpen the other one. However, if one were to have two different observers studying the same electron, could each of them focus on a different property? And, if they could, would it then be possible to, using this data, accurately predict the electron's future path? |
|
Re: Dual observation
Link |
by
on 2005-07-09 01:36:05 |
the moment one observer takes a reading, the state of the particle being observed has been altered. therefore, the results will not reflect the complete original state of the particle. 
|
|
Re: Dual observation
Link |
by EricSoLazy
on 2005-07-12 16:11:57
|
|
Heisenberg's uncertain priciple in quantuam machanics works such that the only way we can observe an electron or any elementary particle, we need to use other elementary particles. Normally bouncing a particle or engery packet off of an object to get an observation doesnt affect it, but because elementary particels are so small, observing will change either its position or velocity.. if you bounce two engery packets at once at the exact same time... its just going to double in change, rather than nulling it out.
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
Re: Dual observation
Link |
by the arch dandy
on 2005-07-13 01:53:50
|
|
As accurately pointed out above, it would be impossible to simultaneously accurately find out the position and momentum of the particle concerned. More accuracy for determining its position = less accuracy for the value of the momentum of the particle. More accuracy for value of the momentum of the particle = less accuracy in determining its position. |
|
Re: Dual observation
Link |
by space cadet
on 2005-07-25 16:36:07
|
| The only possible way to know both the position and velocity of a particle would be if its' velocity was equal to zero, unfortunately this would require the particle to have no energy, which would put it at absolute zero, even more unfortunately to get anything to absolute zero would require the removal of all heat from the universe. I think we can do without knowing precisely where something is. Also, some other physics rule, I forget which, tells us that if you calculate somethings position with enough accuracy, it could exist anywhere in the universe, so when you say you know exactly where something is, you don't, because if you did, you'd have lost it. |
|
Re: Dual observation
|
|
Wow... Some people actually understand this. Heh. I was dissapointed with my physics mark... I did really well, but I could have done better... Anyways, the reason, as already stated, why you can't determine position and velocity at the same time is your measurement requires a Compton-like collision which changes the values for the electron. Anyways, that's Quantum Mechanics and does not really apply to anything larger than an electron. Sub-Atomic Theory-> Molecular to Planetary -> Really Large or Fast Quantum Mechanics -> Newtonian Physics -> General and Special Relativity "Also, some other physics rule, I forget which, tells us that if you calculate somethings position with enough accuracy, it could exist anywhere in the universe, so when you say you know exactly where something is, you don't, because if you did, you'd have lost it." That would be the electron cloud model of the atom.
Despair From Darkness
|