Kenneth M.

Senados
MS Physics I
Phys241 Quantum Mechanics 1
Quantum Behavior
Atomic Mechanics
Things on the atomic scale behave nothing like the ordinary. In fact, things on this
scale as Feynman describes is an unlikely ordinary experience which appears mysterious
to everyone both to the novice and experienced physicist.We all know very well how big
things like balls and cars act, but things on the atomic scale dont act on the same way.
Things on this scale is impossible to describe in the classical way. They do not behave
like particles or waves or like anything.
In 1926 and 1927, Schrodinger,Heisenberg, and Bohr resolved the confusion on atomic
behaviors by obtaining a consistent description of matter on the atomic scale. Quantum
Mechanics describes the behavior of matter and light in all details, in particular to the
happenings on atomic scale. The obtained description applies to all atomic objects.
What apples to electrons applies to protons, neutrons, photons and the like.
An experiment with bullets and waves
The electrons were thought at rst as particles and then later it was found out
that in many aspects it behaves like waves so it really behaves like neither. To try to
understand the quantum behavior of electrons, an experimental setup with the more
particular behavior of particles like bullets, and with the behavior of waves like water
waves is presented here.
Figure 1: Interference experiment with bullets.
Consider and ideal experimental setup shown in Figure 1 which describes the behav-
ior of bullets and answers the question on what the probability is that a bullet which
passes through the holes will arrive at the backstop and be detected by the detector.
1
The setup contains a machine gun which res indestructible bullets randomly over a
fairly large angular speed. In front it is a wall that has two holes just big enough for the
bullets to pass through. Beyond the wall is a backstop which absorbs the bullet when
they hit it. It also has a detector of bullets that can be moved back and forth in the x-axis.
We shall say that these bullets always arrive in indentical lumps. What is measure
with the detector is the probability of arrival of a lump and is measured as a function of
x. The result is plotted in the graph drawn in part (c) of Figure 1. We call the probabil-
ity P
12
because the bullets may have come through either hole 1 or 2. P
12
is large near
the middle of the graph but gets small as x gets large. However we may wonder why
P
12
has its maximum at x = 0. This can be understood by covering one of the holes at
a time. The maximum of P
1
occurs at the value of x which is on the straight line with
the gun and hole 1. This is also true for the maximum of the probability P
2
. Comparing
parts (b) and (c) of Figure 1, we see a very important result that
P
12
= P
1
+ P
2
. (1)
The eect of both holes open is the sum the eect with each hole open alone. The
bullets come in lumps and their probability shows no interference.
Now consider again a experimental set-up shown in Figure 2 which describes the
behavior of waves.The setup is composed of a shallow trough of water which will be the
water source jiggled up and down by a motor and makes circular waves.To the right of
the detector is a wall with two holes and beyond is a second wall which is the absorber
with a detector attached that can be moved back and forth in the x-axis.The detector
measures the wave intensity.
Figure 2: Interference experiment with waves.
With this wave apparatus, it is observed that the intensity of the wave vary. The
intensity can have any value at all. There was no lumpiness in the wave inten-
2
sity.Measuring the wave intensity for various values of x, we get the curve marked I
12
in
the gure. In this case we would observed that the original wave is diracted at the holes
and new circular waves spread out the hole. However, if we cover one hole at a time and
measure the wave intensity in the absorber, we see a rather simple curve shown in part
(b) of the gure. The intensity I
12
is denitely not the sum of I
1
and I
2
. We see that
there are series of constructive and destructive interference of the two waves. The waves
interfere destructively at places where the two waves arrive in the detector with phase
dierence of . The low values of I
12
refer to where the waves interfere destructively.
The quantitative relationship between I
1
, I
2
, and I
12
and the proper relation for
interfering waves are
I
1
=| h
1
|
2
, I
2
=| h
2
|
2
, I
12
=| h
1
+ h
2
|
2
. (2)
which is very dierent from the results obtained with the bullets. Expanding | h
1
+ h
2
62
we see that
| h
1
+ h
2
|
2
=| h
1
2
+ | h
2
+ 2 | h
1
| h
2
cos (3)
where is the phase dierence between h
1
and h
2
. In terms of the intensities, we could
write
I
12
= I
1
+ I
2
+ 2

I
1
I
2
cos. (4)
where the last term is the interference term.
The experiment with electrons
Now the same experiment discussed previously is done with the electrons. The setup
is described below:
3
Figure 3: Interference experiment with electrons.
Noticed from the electron experiment is a sound of clicks from the detector and
all these clicks are the same. However, these clicks come very erratically the same
as what is heard in a geiger counter. As the detector is moved around, it is noticed that
the intensity of the sound varies but the loudness stays the same. It is also noticed that
if there are two detectors,one or the other will click, but not both at once. Thus, we can
say that electrons arrive in lumps.
Now we can answer the question on the probability of the arrival of the electron at
the backstop. The result of the experiment is an interesting curved marked P
12
in Figure
3.
From the observations in the experiments, we can say that each electron either goes
through hole 1 or it goes through hole 2. However,the result of the probability P
12
is clearly not the same with the result that we have with the experiment of bullets.
Instead, P
12
is comparable to the one we got with the water waves. Thus we say there
is interference. For electrons,
P
12
= P
1
+ P
2
. (5)
which is quite mysterious. The relation of P
1
and P
2
with P
12
can be described by two
complex numbers that we can call
1
and
2
. The mathematics for P
12
is the same for
the water waves. Thus we say that
P
12
=|
1
+
2
|
2
. (6)
We conclude that the electrons arrive in lumps like particles and the probability of
the arrival of these lumps is distributed like the distribution of the intensity of a wave.
Now, since it is not true that P
12
= P
1
+P
2
then electrons neither go through hole 1 or
hole 2.
4
Another experiment was done in order to see in which hole the electrons pass through.
We may add a light source behind the walls in the middle of the two holes and observe
where the electrons pass through. In this setup however, it is surprising that we get a
dierent result. We see that the probability that an electron will arrive at the backstop
it similar to the experiment with bullets. We no longer get the old interference curve
P
12
but if we turn o the light, we get again P
12
.If the electrons are not seen, we have
interference. The light (whatever its intensity or frequency is)might have disturb the
behavior of the electrons. In this experiment, it was found out that it is impossible to
observe as to which hole the electron went through without disturbing its pattern.
Heisenberg proposed his uncertainty principle which can state the experiments de-
scribe as follows: It is impossible to design an apparatus to determine which hole the
electron went through without disturbing the electrons enough to destroy the interference
pattern.
This is quantum mechanics. Quite dierent with what we know in classical mechan-
ics. In the experiment with electrons, it is impossible to predict exactly what would
happen. What has been talk about here are only probabilities that a certain event will
happen.
The uncertainty principle
Heisenbergs uncertainty principle tells us that if we make the measurement of any
object,and we can determine the x-component its momentum with an uncertainty p,
we cannot, at the same time, know its x-position more accurately than x = h/p
where h is the Plancks constant. The uncertainties of the momentum and position must
have their product greater than Plancks constant. The uncertainty principle protects
quantum mechanics. If it was possible that we measure the momentum and position
with greater accuracy, then quanum mechanics would collapse. With these, quantum
mechanics was able to live but with much mystery.
5