Heisenberg principle of observation1/3/2024 ![]() ![]() My client discussed a number of approaches: 1) He could attend the meetings and teach the individuals how he wanted them to work together 2) He could invite everyone and then just sit in the background and watch and 3) Alternatively, he could ask everyone to be there and not attend, providing some outcomes in advance that he’d like to see.Īs we talked about his approaches, I asked him what he had done so far with his ideas. The first step was to invite them to host their own meetings. That knowledge helped him as he talked about how to approach a goal of eliciting more independence from his people. He acknowledged that it existed and realized that any time he entered the system he would be changing its dynamics. We can’t change the Observer Effect, but knowing about it can help us understand how our teams, as systems themselves, function – with or without us.Ī client was speaking with me the other day about developing his subordinates and the Observer Effect came up. Sometimes that is with real intent but so very often it just happens without us noticing it. And when we enter a system, we change it. We human beings are always part of a system or systems. I sat with that knowledge for a while and realized that it has applicability to how each of us interacts with others, with our environment, and even with our technology. I was fascinated that by trying to observe and measure particles or waves we actually change them. So when I saw an article recently on “Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle,” I read further and learned about what is called the “Observer Effect,” which, in physics, is described as the disturbance of an observed system by the act of observation. ![]() The calculation is slightly involved and I'll leave a reference.My apologies to the physicists who might be reading this. What if we didn't have a perfect measuring setup: like yourĮxample of the probe photon affecting the system? Then the best weĬan do is definitely worse than the Heisenberg limit and that canĪlso be calculated.So even if you had no measurement errors, you couldn't saturate the Heisenberg limit. But, linearity of quantum mechanics prevents you from cloning states. Then we could do statistics on all the results, to make a measurement which saturates the Heisenberg limit. If we could clone arbitrarily many copies of a quantum state, then we could run the measurement multiple times (once on each cloned copy, since measuring would collapse the wavefunction). If you set out to measure observable properties of a quantum state, there are further sources of "error". $$\sigma_x \sigma_p \ge \frac$ here) varies in different derivations, depending on how exactly you define $\Delta A$ and $\Delta B$, but the essence is the same. You can then calculate the variance of each function, $\sigma_x^2$ and $\sigma_p^2$ respectively, using formulas given on Wikipedia, and you will find that these two quantities obey the relationship These two functions are Fourier transforms of each other. Its true meaning is explained in detail on the Wikipedia page, but the gist is that if you have a wave, you can express it as a function of position, $\psi(x)$, or of momentum, $\phi(p)$. ![]() It's a purely mathematical statement about waves. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle actually has nothing to do with any particular experiment, or any particular interaction. ![]() It is the error created by photons striking on elementary particles ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |