4 ms·
You probably mean: "A quantum measurement influences the system being observed: The act of observation injects a kind of random noise into the system. This is
by dangirsh 7y ago
You probably mean:
"A quantum measurement influences the system being observed: The act of observation injects a kind of random noise into the system. This is ultimately the source of Heisenberg’s famous uncertainty principle."
I'd agree that's an inaccurate description of the uncertainty principle, but then the following sentences are:
"The uncertainty in a measurement is not, as Heisenberg initially thought, an effect of clumsy intervention in a delicate quantum system—a photon striking a particle and pushing it off course, say. Rather, it’s an unavoidable outcome of the intrinsically randomizing effect of observation itself."
I'm not sure I could explain it better at this level...
- Koshkin 7y agoWell, it has to be reminded that the uncertainty principle and the randomness of the outcome of a measurement are two different things. The former involves two observables which cannot be measured simultaneously with an arbitrary precision whereas the latter is the result of an observable having more than one eigenvalue.
- kgwgk 7y agoI have not thought this through, but it seems to me that if all observables commuted there would be no randomness and if there was no randomness all observables would commute. Does anyone see an obvious flaw on this?
- joycian 7y agoI would rather these kinds of articles just explain the uncertainty principle in a wave mechanics context, without any quantum theory to obfuscate. Or else just go "What if AB != BA?" and actually somewhat give people an entrance point to what is actually happening.