henry.pha.jhu.edu/Marburger.pdf
Two excerpts
follow (emphasis added):
It is not true that
the underlying stuff sometimes behaves like a wave and sometimes like a
particle. It always behaves like itself,
but we sometimes choose to measure one property, sometimes another. When we choose to measure momentum, we find
momentum clicks. When we choose to
measure position, we find position clicks.
= = = = =
Why all the talk about waves and particles? That has to do, in part, with the different
kinds of detectors. You can make an
apparatus that triggers a momentum detector consistently at the same value p –
so its histogram just has one tall bar reaching to 100% at p. It is a fact of Nature that the same
apparatus will trigger an array of position detectors in a wave pattern with a
definite wavelength precisely equal to h/p, where h is the tiny “Planck’s
constant”. (Multiple trials have to be
run to generate the histogram. See the figures on the next page.) The
wave is not in the underlying stuff, it is in the spatial pattern of detector
clicks. We do not – cannot – measure
waves in the underlying stuff. We
can only measure detector clicks. But
when we hear the click we say “there’s an electron!” We cannot help but think of the clicks as
caused by little localized pieces of stuff that we might as well call
particles. This is where the particle language comes from. It does not come from the underlying stuff,
but from our psychological predisposition to associate localized phenomena with
particles. That predisposition is
reinforced by the fact that in large scale Nature there are particles whose
trajectories we can trace to an accuracy limited by the size of Planck’s
constant. This is how the Copenhagen
Interpretation frames the wave versus particle issue.
= = = = =
On The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics
Symposium on "The Copenhagen Interpretation: Science and History on Stage"
National Museum of Natural History of the Smithsonian Institution
John Marburger Director, Office of Science and Technology Policy
March 2, 2002
No comments:
Post a Comment