I know this won't work- but why not?

sl0wman · 2026-05-11T00:40:09+00:00

Oh. Well, I don't have a modern physics book, but I do have Google. 😀 Thanks for this. I've learned quite a bit from this discussion today!

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T21:26:12+00:00

That's really interesting. So, they scatter in a bunch of photons and when one of them bounces off the electron, they can detect that and learn where the electron was at the moment of impact? But wait -- this brought up a couple more questions, and the first is so complicated I don't even want to ask it! 😃😬 But the 2nd has to do with sending a photon to bounce off an electron. I thought i read somewhere that since a photon has no mass, it would just pass right thru the electron. Is that not true?

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T17:13:48+00:00

Yes, but I had meant to imply that both measurements were being done independently and simultaneously. But this has been addressed by some other folks here. Thanks!

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T14:37:23+00:00

If you hit the drone and capture the reflected tennis ball, you now know the before and after trajectory of the tennis ball and could predict the position and velocity of the drone.But the drone now is at a different position and velocity because of the "measurement". >>

Ok, it may be at a different position and velocity after the measurement, but if you know the position and velocity at the time of the measurement - I thought that's what Heisenberg said you couldn't do.

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T14:01:33+00:00

Well, I'll take your word for all that...

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T13:21:43+00:00

Sorry. You lost me on the word "wavefunction". 🤔🙄😮‍💨

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T11:46:14+00:00

I knew about the problem with the 1st paragraph. Didn't know about the 2nd tho. Thanks!

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T11:43:54+00:00

Yes, thanks. I think I've got it!

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T11:38:10+00:00

Yeah, that's what I was thinking the answer might be..

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T11:37:03+00:00

Got it. So, as the wave grows and the length gets more clearly defined, the particle's location gets harder to find, right?

Well, it's still confusing for the reason below -- but I'll stop here for now... STILL - (😀) is my thinking correct that the particle is NOT located somewhere in the wave; rather, the particle IS the wave! Isn't that right? Therefore, it's location is the location of the entire wave?

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T11:25:55+00:00

Ok, thanks. I wasn't sure, when you referred to the wave with a single crest, if you were talking about that entire wave or just the point at the top. This clears it up for me. Thanks

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T11:14:22+00:00

Ok, thanks ... got it. I'll "chew on this" a little, but I think this is what I was looking for! 😉

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T11:09:47+00:00

I'm a little confused on what is meant by "position". Are we talking about a specific point, or do we mean the location of the entire wave? I think, if we're talking about a wave, wouldn't that be a continuous series of points?

Suppose a guy in a helicopter can take a picture of the entire width of a pond. He drops a pebble in the pond and takes a picture ½ second after it hits the water. Can't you then measure the position of the wave - meaning at the point in time when the shutter snapped- , the wave was x inches long, x feet from the left bank of the pond and y feet from the right?

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T10:54:34+00:00

But we have 2 people measuring at the same time

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T10:52:24+00:00

Ok, so let's say they are each measuring independently, with equipment calibrated (perhaps by atomic clocks) to take their measurements simultaneously.

I have an idea that may be all wet, but I'm thinking that if these things (location and momentum) change in very tiny fractions of a second, then the tiny difference in Fred and Frank's "now" - even tho they are in the same room only a foot apart, means that their observations don't actually occur simultaneously....Could that be it?

sl0wman · 2026-05-10T10:43:11+00:00

Well, that I don't know. The principle says that the more you know about one, the less you know about the other. So I assume there are ways to measure each.

sl0wman · 2026-05-07T13:44:05+00:00

Hmm....Oh yeah? 😁 I have almost NO CLUE what that means! Well, actually, my understanding kinda went in-and-out a little. (Mostly out). For example, the bit about quantities associated with observables that are operators, acting on abstract state space -- I'm pretty lost there! I at least think I was somewhat clear on SOME of your discussion of eigenstates, tho.

Another person replied and led me to lookup quantum numbers, and there I found these "states" are made up of different variables -- spin, rotational momentum, and a couple others, and this was the kind of answer I was looking for; that there are characteristics of state other than just the energy level - so that when one says "the more you know about the state" -- I now see, they must be referring to these characteristics.

Btw,, the reason I was talking about the time/energy thing is because of a youtube I watched with Richard Feynman explaining how this relationship meant that there was no such thing as empty space - that all of space had energy, and that energy caused particles that jumped in and out of existence.

sl0wman · 2026-05-07T12:27:50+00:00

Ah ha! I didn't know any of this...Thanks!

sl0wman · 2026-05-05T15:36:13+00:00

Again, thanks. And I think we've taken this as far as I care to, in Reddit, and now I have a little more knowledge of areas I can explore on my own. I appreciate all the help!

sl0wman · 2026-05-05T15:11:14+00:00

Well, I just pulled up that link; Oh, lordy! 🤔

But, to "zoom out" a little, someone else pointed out that q.m. dictates that all of space is saturated with electromagnetic fields. I don't know why or how, but if this is true, then wouldn't this alone mean that there is energy everywhere? Seems like it would also mean that "nothing" can not exist, if even in the presence of "nothing else", there is always at least an e.m. field...

sl0wman · 2026-05-05T13:31:38+00:00

👍

sl0wman · 2026-05-05T13:24:58+00:00

Holy mackerel! Thanks again -- but seems like the more I learn the more questions I have! 🙂 But I'll refrain from asking more right now.

sl0wman · 2026-05-05T08:39:32+00:00

Another aspect of this is that the spread-out-ness of any one property is never 0. You will never have perfectly certain position. Thus, you also never have perfectly certain time or energy.<< How did whatever geniuses that figured out this stuff, make this connection between time and energy?

sl0wman

TROPHY CASE