This space is for questions, comments, discussions, observations and constructive implementable suggestions for the course Quantum Physics PHY 204/ SE 301 at IIT Kanpur 2011.
Disclaimer: This blog is purely for educational purpose.
All links and photos/images are referenced and acknowledged. I will remove any such link or images if
there is objection to their use.
the following doubts have been answered in the section on compton effect... they have been reposted here for ease of documentation and accessibility...
1>> in the microscope thought experiment the statemnt is "we can see the electron if only one scattered photon enters the objective lens of the microscope"... later we speak of a diffraction pattern due to which the position of the electron is uncertain... would a single scattered photon form a diffraction pattern?? isnt it expected to show particle-like dot in the measurement device (retina) that ABSORBS it?
i am a bit lost in the hand waving it seems... plz help...
2>> sir, the textbook continues on the lines of the gamma ray microscope thought experiment and tries to derive the energy-time uncertainty from the same ideas... while doing so they take px/m = vx as the recoil velocity due to the incident illumination... however this was the velocity before illumination... the recoil velocity seems to my eyes more likely to be del-px/m the quantity vx del-t they call uncertainty is simply the distance travelled in the original direction over the time of obsevation which can be which is precisely known if time of illumination(which is in our hands) is specified exactly. i am not able to find the quantum uncertainty in this... where am i going wrong?
can a finite del-lambda actually result in nonzero amplitude being completely restricted in a finite del-x?? i am somehow not able to convince myself that this can happen without seeing it in a graph...
any finite number of waves howsoever closely spaced would have auxiliary waves after a finite spatial period(=LCM of wavelengths)... to get rid of these auxiliaries we need to discard any possibility of discreteness in the wavelength available to the photon... but if any method of generating these photons has an inherent discreteness associated with it isnt our assumption of a continuum of freq available to the photon just a mathematical idealization? if there is no continuum then the particle may be in any of the auxiliary waves extending over all space... where am i going wrong?
the following doubts have been answered in the section on compton effect... they have been reposted here for ease of documentation and accessibility...
ReplyDelete1>> in the microscope thought experiment the statemnt is "we can see the electron if only one scattered photon enters the objective lens of the microscope"... later we speak of a diffraction pattern due to which the position of the electron is uncertain... would a single scattered photon form a diffraction pattern?? isnt it expected to show particle-like dot in the measurement device (retina) that ABSORBS it?
i am a bit lost in the hand waving it seems... plz help...
2>> sir, the textbook continues on the lines of the gamma ray microscope thought experiment and tries to derive the energy-time uncertainty from the same ideas... while doing so they take px/m = vx as the recoil velocity due to the incident illumination... however this was the velocity before illumination... the recoil velocity seems to my eyes more likely to be del-px/m
ReplyDeletethe quantity vx del-t they call uncertainty is simply the distance travelled in the original direction over the time of obsevation which can be which is precisely known if time of illumination(which is in our hands) is specified exactly. i am not able to find the quantum uncertainty in this... where am i going wrong?
can a finite del-lambda actually result in nonzero amplitude being completely restricted in a finite del-x?? i am somehow not able to convince myself that this can happen without seeing it in a graph...
ReplyDeleteany finite number of waves howsoever closely spaced would have auxiliary waves after a finite spatial period(=LCM of wavelengths)... to get rid of these auxiliaries we need to discard any possibility of discreteness in the wavelength available to the photon... but if any method of generating these photons has an inherent discreteness associated with it isnt our assumption of a continuum of freq available to the photon just a mathematical idealization? if there is no continuum then the particle may be in any of the auxiliary waves extending over all space...
where am i going wrong?