Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

198 submissions , 156 unreviewed
4,910 questions , 2,086 unanswered
5,311 answers , 22,546 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
805 active unimported users
More ...

  How to understand the wave-particle duality of quantum mechanics?

+ 0 like - 3 dislike
209 views

As the theory shows, quantum mechanics describes the microscopic properties of nature in a regime where classical mechanics no longer applies. It explains phenomena such as the wave-particle duality, quantization of energy and the uncertainty principle and is generally used in single body systems.

Here, I have a question: how to understand how the wave-particle duality of quantum mechanics relates to nature, the real physical world of, say, a photon, or an electron?  

"Never in the history of science has there been a theory which has had such a profound impact on human thinking as quantum mechanics; nor has there been a theory which scored such spectacular successes in the prediction of such an enormous variety of phenomena (atomic physics, solid state physics, chemistry, etc.). Furthermore, for all that is known today, quantum mechanics is the only consistent theory of elementary processes. "--Max Jammer: The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics: The Interpretations of QM in historical perspective.  John Wiley and Sons 1974.

"Scientists have been using quantum theory for almost a century now, but embarrassingly they still don't know what it means.  An informal poll taken at a 2011 conference on Quantum Physics and the Nature of Reality showed that there’s still no consensus on what quantum theory says about reality — the participants remained deeply divided about how the theory should be interpreted"--https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-to-tame-quantum-weirdness-20170216/

Debates in the foundations of quantum mechanics sometimes appearas endless parti-
san squabbling between dogmatically-committed proponents of different viewpoints,
none of whose minds are ever changed. Still, in addition to learning how proponents
of different theories describe and develop their favored perspectives, it can be valu-
able to understand the criticisms that proponents of one theory level against its rivals
.”
--Travis Norsen: Foundations of Quantum Mechanics | An Exploration of the Physical Meaning of Quantum Theory   http://www.springer.com/series/8917

"My own conclusion (not universally shared) is that today there is no interpretation of quantum mechanics that does not have serious flaws, and that we ought to take seriously the possibility of finding some more satisfactory other theory, to which quantum mechanics is merely a good approximation. "--Weinberg Steven,  Lectures on quantum mechanics /  ISBN 978-1-107-02872-2   http://www.cambridge.org/9781107028722

asked Jan 21 in General Physics by Delong Duan (-15 points) [ revision history ]
recategorized Jan 22 by Delong Duan

The quotes have nothing to do with your question. They are about unsolved problems in the foundations of quantum mechanics, not about wave-particle duality.

A moving wave packet is not you favorite understanding?

Maybe the answer here will help you ,

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
$\varnothing\hbar$ysicsOverflow
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...