3 ms·

Ugh, I believed this too. Could you elaborate so that the misconceptions are cleared? (or give a link if the explanation would be too long)

• jblow 10y ago
  The reason this explanation is so widespread is that it is actually not false. However, the actual uncertainty in the Uncertainty Principle takes place at a much deeper existential level, in a more-important way, so this is a woefully incomplete explanation. The actual uncertainty comes from the fact that the two quantities are Fourier transforms of each other... and just by that relationship, inherently, if one gets very localized (== very high frequency bump in its space), its Fourier dual gets spread out very far through space. (You can sort-of analogize this if you know about audio ... a sharp spike in temporal space, when transformed into frequency space, becomes a very big spread of values, because all those frequencies are relatively blunt and they have to somehow fit together to make this sharp thing, which requires an enormous number of them. Or if you go the other way, a sharp spike in frequency space means one frequency, which transforms into an infinitely-long sine wave in temporal space. So think about that kind of thing, except instead these are waveforms where the y value is kind-of the probability of getting that particular x-value as a result if you perform a measurement.)
  • pvitz 10y ago
    That's a rather classical explanation and although it's correct, I would say the uncertainty of non-commuting operators is more fundamental.
  • EGreg 10y ago
    That's only because of the model. Which could be wrong.
• monktastic1 10y ago
  I'm sure I can find a better resource than Wikipedia, but for now: > Historically, the uncertainty principle has been confused[5][6] with a somewhat similar effect in physics, called the observer effect, which notes that measurements of certain systems cannot be made without affecting the systems, that is, without changing something in a system. Heisenberg offered such an observer effect at the quantum level (see below) as a physical "explanation" of quantum uncertainty.[7] It has since become clear, however, that the uncertainty principle is inherent in the properties of all wave-like systems,[8] and that it arises in quantum mechanics simply due to the matter wave nature of all quantum objects. Thus, the uncertainty principle actually states a fundamental property of quantum systems, and is not a statement about the observational success of current technology.[9] It must be emphasized that measurement does not mean only a process in which a physicist-observer takes part, but rather any interaction between classical and quantum objects regardless of any observer.[10][note 1] > Bohr was compelled to modify his understanding of the uncertainty principle after another thought experiment by Einstein. In 1935, Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen (see EPR paradox) published an analysis of widely separated entangled particles. Measuring one particle, Einstein realized, would alter the probability distribution of the other, yet here the other particle could not possibly be disturbed. This example led Bohr to revise his understanding of the principle, concluding that the uncertainty was not caused by a direct interaction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle