Skip to main content

How Do Physicists Deal with Interference?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Quantum Sense and Nonsense
  • 1118 Accesses

Abstract

So, we have seen one of the two “impossible things that we have to believe before breakfast” namely things being apparently in two different states before being measured or before one looks at them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See the Appendix for somewhat more precise mathematical treatment; however it is not necessary to read the Appendix in order to follow the rest of the arguments.

  2. 2.

    Note for the advanced reader: throughout this book, we shall not distinguish between the wave function of a physical system and its quantum state, which is a more general notion.

  3. 3.

    In mathematics, a function is usually denoted f(x), but for the wave function the notation \(\Psi (x)\) is almost universal.

  4. 4.

    A caveat is necessary here: the number \(\Psi (x)\) is in reality a complex number and one should write \(|\Psi (x)|^2\) instead of \(\Psi (x)^2\), see the Appendix.

  5. 5.

    This fact follows from the law of large numbers, discussed in Sect. 3.4.1.

  6. 6.

    In Chap. 8 we shall see that \(\Psi (x)^2\) can actually be understood as being related to the probability of the particle being at point x, but that will be possible only within a more complete theory than ordinary quantum mechanics.

  7. 7.

    We will discuss in the next chapter some apparently natural ways to understand what the wave function means (and see that they run into problems). We will later give a physical meaning to the wave function, in Chap. 8.

  8. 8.

    To see this, consider the following example:

    $$\begin{aligned} (3+4)^2= 7^2= 49 \ne 3^2+ 4^2= 9+16=25. \end{aligned}$$
    (4.3)

    In general, for real numbers a and b, we have:

    $$\begin{aligned} (a+b)^2 \ne a^2+ b^2, \end{aligned}$$
    (4.4)

    or, with \(a= \Psi _1 (x, t)\) and \(b= \Psi _2 (x, t)\),

    $$\begin{aligned} (\Psi _1 (x, t)+ \Psi _2 (x, t))^2 \ne ( \Psi _1 (x, t) )^2+ ( \Psi _2 (x, t) )^2, \end{aligned}$$
    (4.5)

    namely the square of a sum is not equal to the sum of the squares!

  9. 9.

    We speak of a half circle because the picture is two dimensional, but of course in three dimensions the spreading would be over a hemisphere.

  10. 10.

    The situation is not very different than what happens in the two slits experiment when only one slit is open (see parts (a) and (b) of Fig. 2.6).

  11. 11.

    Here Einstein writes \((\Psi )^2\) of what we write \(\Psi (x)^2\), x being the point to which he refers (Note by J.B.).

  12. 12.

    We will come back to what measurements of velocity really are in Sect. 8.3.

  13. 13.

    Heisenberg, and physicists generally, speak of momentum measurements rather than velocity measurements, but momentum is simply defined as the product of the mass times the velocity.

  14. 14.

    For the more mathematical reader: there is a standard way to measure how spread out a probability distribution is and it is given by the variance of that probability distribution. Let \(\text {Var}(x)\) denote the variance of the distribution of the measurements of the position x and \(\text {Var}(p)\) the variance of the distribution of the product of the mass m times the measurements of the velocity v: \(p=mv\). What Heisenberg showed is that their product cannot be made arbitrarily small and satisfies a lower bound:

    $$\begin{aligned} \text{ Var }(x) \text{ Var }(p) \ge \frac{1}{4}, \end{aligned}$$
    (4.6)

    where the value \(\frac{1}{4}\) depends on a choice of physical units that we shall not discuss. But, independently of this value, what this lower bound implies is that, if \(\text {Var}(x)\)is very small, then \(\text {Var}(p)\) must be very large, and vice-versa.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean Bricmont .

Appendices

Appendix

4.A The Wave Function

The first precision to be made about the wave function is that \(\Psi (x)\) is in general a complex number and, to be correct, one should have written everywhere \(|\Psi (x)|^2\) instead of \(\Psi (x)^2\) in Sects. 4.1 and 4.2, where, for a complex number \(z=a+ib\), \(|z|^2= a^2+ b^2\).

The fact that the total area under the curve in Fig. 4.3 is equal to one means that \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\Psi (x)|^2 dx =1\). This ensures that the probability of finding the particle somewhere is equal to one, as it should!

The probability of finding the particle in a region A is therefore \(\int _A |\Psi (x)|^2 dx\), see Fig. 4.3.

Finally, in order to keep that constraint, each of the collapsed wave functions, after a measurement, must also satisfy \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\Psi (x)|^2 dx =1\). In Fig. 4.5, the situation is symmetric and, since the regions where \(\Psi _1(x)\) and \(\Psi _1(x)\) are non-zero do not overlap, one has \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\Psi (x)|^2 dx= \int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\Psi _1(x)|^2 dx + \int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\Psi _2(x)|^2 dx=1\) and thus \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\Psi _1(x)|^2 dx = \int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\Psi _2(x)|^2 dx=\frac{1}{2}\). So, the collapsed wave function is not \(\Psi _1(x)\) or \( \Psi _2(x)\), as we said in Sect. 4.2, but rather \(\sqrt{2} \Psi _1(x)\) or \(\sqrt{2} \Psi _2(x)\), that satisfy \(\int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\sqrt{2} \Psi _1(x)|^2 dx = \int _{{\mathbb {R}}}|\sqrt{2} \Psi _2(x)|^2 dx=1\).

To illustrate the phenomenon of constructive and destructive interferences, consider Fig. 4.13, where the three curves represent the functions \(\Psi _1 (x)^2\), \(\Psi _2(x)^2\) and \((\Psi _1 (x)+ \Psi _2(x))^2 \) (we suppress the variable t here). We chose those functions (with the x axis drawn horizontally), so that they resemble (qualitatively) the wiggly blue curve on the right of Fig. 4.10. We note that the function \((\Psi _1 (x) +\Psi _2 (x))^2\) may vanish at points x where neither \(\Psi _1 (x)^2\) nor \(\Psi _2 (x)^2\) vanish. It can also be larger than the sum \(\Psi _1 (x)^2+ \Psi _2 (x)^2\) for other x’s. In the latter case, one says that the waves interfere constructively and in the former one that they interfere destructively.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bricmont, J. (2017). How Do Physicists Deal with Interference?. In: Quantum Sense and Nonsense. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65271-9_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics