Skip to main content
added 3 characters in body
Source Link
Alfred Centauri
  • 60.3k
  • 3
  • 75
  • 208

A quantum particle (entity) resists description in macroscopic, classical terms.

If we attempt to detect the presence of a quantum particle, we find that it interacts with our detector at (more or less) a point in space; it was detected here and not anywhere else (certainly not two or more places at once). This is the particle-like nature.

On the other hand, quantum particles can exhibit the property of interference which suggests that there is also a wave-like nature.

So, whatever a quantum particle is possesses particle-like and wave-like properties but is neither a particle or wave.

Now, keep in mind that detection is interaction. We can only detect a quantum particle by interacting with it in some way and this interaction generally leaves the particle in a different state after the interaction than before.

So, while can detect, e.g., an electron at a point with a particle detector, it isn't meaningful to picture the electron as a point particle in that location just before the detection.

We can say that the (previously undetected) electron interacted with our detection apparatus at that point, exhibiting the particle-like nature, but in general, there is a non-zero probability that it could have interacted elsewhere in our detector which is decidedly non-particle-like behaviour.

And also what is the actual mechanism behind it because I can't seem to find the answer or is it simply that no one knows?

It's not clear what you mean by mechanism but I think it likely that the best answer is no one knows. We can mathematically model these quantum entities with wave function(al)s obeying wave equations, quantum fields obeying wave equations, etc., and test the predictions of these models against experiment.

However, the ontology of these mathematical objects (what is the ontological status of the wave function?) is unclear (see Interpretations of quantum mechanics).

It states that a wave is continues and infinite but when several waves a joined they can form a pulse and that is a particle.

It's true that a localized pulse can be decomposed into the sum (integral) of an infinity of non-localized waves. However, as I've alluded to above, the ontological status of these waves is unclear.

A quantum particle (entity) resists description in macroscopic, classical terms.

If we attempt to detect the presence of a quantum particle, we find that it interacts with our detector at (more or less) a point in space; it was detected here and not anywhere else (certainly not two or more places at once). This is the particle-like nature.

On the other hand, quantum particles can exhibit the property of interference which suggests that there is also a wave-like nature.

So, whatever a quantum particle is possesses particle-like and wave-like properties but is neither a particle or wave.

Now, keep in mind that detection is interaction. We can only detect a quantum particle by interacting with it in some way and this interaction generally leaves the particle in a different state after the interaction than before.

So, while can detect, e.g., an electron at a point with a particle detector, it isn't meaningful to picture the electron as a point particle in that location just before the detection.

We can say that the (previously undetected) electron interacted with our detection apparatus at that point, exhibiting the particle-like nature, but in general, there is a non-zero probability that it could have interacted elsewhere in our detector which is decidedly non-particle-like behaviour.

And also what is the actual mechanism behind it because I can't seem to find the answer or is it simply that no one knows?

It's not clear what you mean by mechanism but I think it likely that the best answer is no one knows. We can mathematically model these quantum entities with wave function(al)s obeying wave equations, quantum fields obeying wave equations, etc., and test the predictions of these models against experiment.

However, the ontology of these mathematical objects (what is the ontological status of the wave function?) is unclear (see Interpretations of quantum mechanics).

It states that a wave is continues and infinite but when several waves a joined they can form a pulse and that is a particle.

It's true that a localized pulse can be decomposed into the sum (integral) of an infinity of non-localized waves. However, as I've alluded to above, ontological status of these waves is unclear.

A quantum particle (entity) resists description in macroscopic, classical terms.

If we attempt to detect the presence of a quantum particle, we find that it interacts with our detector at (more or less) a point in space; it was detected here and not anywhere else (certainly not two or more places at once). This is the particle-like nature.

On the other hand, quantum particles can exhibit the property of interference which suggests that there is also a wave-like nature.

So, whatever a quantum particle is possesses particle-like and wave-like properties but is neither a particle or wave.

Now, keep in mind that detection is interaction. We can only detect a quantum particle by interacting with it in some way and this interaction generally leaves the particle in a different state after the interaction than before.

So, while can detect, e.g., an electron at a point with a particle detector, it isn't meaningful to picture the electron as a point particle in that location just before the detection.

We can say that the (previously undetected) electron interacted with our detection apparatus at that point, exhibiting the particle-like nature, but in general, there is a non-zero probability that it could have interacted elsewhere in our detector which is decidedly non-particle-like behaviour.

And also what is the actual mechanism behind it because I can't seem to find the answer or is it simply that no one knows?

It's not clear what you mean by mechanism but I think it likely that the best answer is no one knows. We can mathematically model these quantum entities with wave function(al)s obeying wave equations, quantum fields obeying wave equations, etc., and test the predictions of these models against experiment.

However, the ontology of these mathematical objects (what is the ontological status of the wave function?) is unclear (see Interpretations of quantum mechanics).

It states that a wave is continues and infinite but when several waves a joined they can form a pulse and that is a particle.

It's true that a localized pulse can be decomposed into the sum (integral) of an infinity of non-localized waves. However, as I've alluded to above, the ontological status of these waves is unclear.

Source Link
Alfred Centauri
  • 60.3k
  • 3
  • 75
  • 208

A quantum particle (entity) resists description in macroscopic, classical terms.

If we attempt to detect the presence of a quantum particle, we find that it interacts with our detector at (more or less) a point in space; it was detected here and not anywhere else (certainly not two or more places at once). This is the particle-like nature.

On the other hand, quantum particles can exhibit the property of interference which suggests that there is also a wave-like nature.

So, whatever a quantum particle is possesses particle-like and wave-like properties but is neither a particle or wave.

Now, keep in mind that detection is interaction. We can only detect a quantum particle by interacting with it in some way and this interaction generally leaves the particle in a different state after the interaction than before.

So, while can detect, e.g., an electron at a point with a particle detector, it isn't meaningful to picture the electron as a point particle in that location just before the detection.

We can say that the (previously undetected) electron interacted with our detection apparatus at that point, exhibiting the particle-like nature, but in general, there is a non-zero probability that it could have interacted elsewhere in our detector which is decidedly non-particle-like behaviour.

And also what is the actual mechanism behind it because I can't seem to find the answer or is it simply that no one knows?

It's not clear what you mean by mechanism but I think it likely that the best answer is no one knows. We can mathematically model these quantum entities with wave function(al)s obeying wave equations, quantum fields obeying wave equations, etc., and test the predictions of these models against experiment.

However, the ontology of these mathematical objects (what is the ontological status of the wave function?) is unclear (see Interpretations of quantum mechanics).

It states that a wave is continues and infinite but when several waves a joined they can form a pulse and that is a particle.

It's true that a localized pulse can be decomposed into the sum (integral) of an infinity of non-localized waves. However, as I've alluded to above, ontological status of these waves is unclear.