http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/may/23/quantum-microscope-peers-into-the-hydrogen-atom http://io9.com/the-first-image-ever-of-a-hydrogen-atoms-orbital-struc-509684901 they are claimed to be images of the actual wave function of hydrogen. Does this mean that wave function is a real object after all?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
asked Jan 7, 2015 at 18:17
-
2$\begingroup$ It's not the wave-function that you see in those images, it's some result predicted by it. In repeated experiments (I understand, each experiment with another atom), the position of the electron in the atom is tested by some technique. Well, it is found that the positions are distributed as predicts the absolute square of the wave-function. If the wave-function is something real? Some people say yes, other people say that it is just a mathematical tool, you probably know this divergence of opinions. $\endgroup$– SofiaJan 8, 2015 at 3:30
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
Maybe we can say that if we assume that the wavefunction is real and we calculate what we would expect to obtain from this experiment the calculated result is the same as the experimental result. Occam's razor might then say, the simplest interpretation is that the wavefunction is real...
...as pointed out by @Sofia the wavefunction is at least a useful mathematical tool.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
As sofia says these images are created by repeatedly recording the position of electrons in many many identical atoms. In that sense you can map out the probability of where an electron will be at any given moment in time which is the square of the wave function. In terms of asking is the wave function "real" this opens up a can of worms. I suggest you look into the many arguments for epistemic or ontic interpretations of the wave function. Particularly for epistemic psi "spekkens toy theory" and for ontic psi have a look at "pbr theory". These may help clarify to what extent we can call the wave function a "real" quantity.
