Timeline for A few details about commutators in QM and Fourier analysis
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 26, 2017 at 4:13 | vote | accept | daniel | ||
| Apr 25, 2017 at 4:08 | comment | added | ZeroTheHero | It does actually: this is more or less the contents of Robertson's derivation of the uncertainty relation. But your question is implicitly deeper IMO because there is some "classical" uncertainty, which is deeply related to the way detectors are coupled to quantum states, as per Arthurs and Kelly (a nice paper... also Stig Stenholm has nice work on this) | |
| Apr 24, 2017 at 22:23 | answer | added | knzhou | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 24, 2017 at 22:02 | answer | added | tparker | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 24, 2017 at 21:49 | history | edited | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 88 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 21:39 | history | edited | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 190 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 21:17 | history | edited | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 17 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 21:00 | history | edited | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 11 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 20:50 | history | edited | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 11 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 20:07 | comment | added | ZeroTheHero | @daniel be so kind as to post a reference link please... :) Thanks for the link! | |
| Apr 24, 2017 at 20:05 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ |
history tag seems obsolete
|
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 19:53 | comment | added | ZeroTheHero | There is more by Uffink and Maassen on the interpretation and difference between the quantum and classical versions (seeEq.(14) in here stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/entries/qt-uncertainty for example of the kinds of delicate discussions involved.) | |
| Apr 24, 2017 at 19:43 | comment | added | ZeroTheHero | Part of the delicate nature of the discussion is that the constants are quite important. Crawford ("Waves; Berkeley physics course vol. 3." (1968)) gives $\Delta k\Delta x\ge 2\pi $ from Fourier analysis of a pulse. There is also work by Arthurs and Kelly ("BSTJ briefs: On the simultaneous measurement of a pair of conjugate observables." The Bell System Technical Journal 44.4 (1965): 725-729.) which gives a kind of "classical limit" to the quantum uncertainty relation. See also work by Ozawa v.g. arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0207121.pdf. Getting the constants right is the tricky part. | |
| Apr 24, 2017 at 17:50 | history | edited | Emilio Pisanty | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 316 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 17:49 | history | edited | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 14 characters in body
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 17:36 | history | edited | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 533 characters in body; edited title
|
| Apr 24, 2017 at 17:33 | history | undeleted | daniel | ||
| Apr 22, 2017 at 20:30 | history | deleted | daniel | via Vote | |
| Apr 22, 2017 at 20:20 | comment | added | ACuriousMind♦ | I think my answer to the first question I linked answers that - the QM uncertainty relation is a much more general consequence of the non-commutativity of operators. | |
| Apr 22, 2017 at 20:00 | comment | added | ACuriousMind♦ | Related/possible duplicates (I'm not quite sure what you're asking): physics.stackexchange.com/q/197821/50583, physics.stackexchange.com/q/47458/50583 | |
| Apr 22, 2017 at 19:54 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 106 characters in body; edited tags
|
| Apr 22, 2017 at 19:53 | history | asked | daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |