Re: Uncertainty principle and an elementary exercise with logs
From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C)1998; HEP DIVISION, ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 8:55:32 -0500
Sam-
I don't understand your note unless you were mislead by my
references to Heisenberg and Schroedinger. The existence or non-existence
of interference fringes has nothing to do with the picture describing the
experiment. The point that I understand from Knight is that one can make
the interference go away without actually doing the "which way"
measurement. This has to do with coherence of beams.
So your finite probability is zero (which is certainly finite).
Regards,
Jack
****************************************************************
Jack,
This doen't seem to be about the Uncertainity principle but which
"picture" of Quantum Mechanics we should be using. The Heisenberg picture
says that the operator changes with time, while Schrodinger says the state
vector changes with time. That means that the active picture of
Schrodinger is correct according to this paper (which I have not read).
This is the same difference as rotating a vector (active) or the
coordinate system (passive). It seems to me that some more thought is
required especially because momentum and position is a conjugate pair of
variables that seems to be coupled to me. Just my $0.02 about that.
Luckily according to QM, I have a finite probability of being right.
Sam Held
**************************
"I scored the next great triumph for science myself,
to wit, how the milk gets into the cow. Both of us
had marveled over that mystery a long time. We had
followed the cows around for years - that is, in the
daytime - but had never caught them drinking fluid of
that color."
Mark Twain, Extract from Eve's
Autobiography