Can a quantum particle be at two locations? Better to say: A particle may not have a location at all. But when it does, it has only one (at least in this universe).pic.twitter.com/GEznxt3rNN
Rather than say "a particle may not have have a location at all", I think it's better to say "the notion of a particle doesn't apply", since "particle" by definition implies it exists at a single point
-
-
Heavy technicality. I'm not sure if I agree. It seems like we use the word "particle" for two different, yet related, concepts. A wave packet is usually considered to represent a "particle". And the other meaning is a point-like object, which doesn't strictly exist by the way.
-
that's what I'm saying.. point like object means an object with definite position, which can exist if it's in a position eigenstate, but in general a free "particle" is going to be a wave packet
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
you have to quantize both the definition of a “particle” and of “location” most physicists think of a particle as a “localizable” wave-function but the quantization of space-time is not that easy, especially if we want to include gravitation
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Or at a single time for that matter.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.