Skip to main content

Uncertainty Principle & the Non-Commutative Property

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commutative_property

Scroll down for relevant discussion on the uncertainty principle.

Understanding the mathematics behind the physics involved is imperative to really understanding Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. We've already discussed the logic behind it and the physical consequences, but now it's time to really get down to the fundamentals. We're going to look at something we tend to take for granted in our daily interactions with math: the commutative property of mathematics.

The commutative property in math applies to addition and multiplication. It basically states that, when combining two "elements" (i.e. numbers), the order does NOT matter. This is demonstrated in the following diagram:

It doesn't matter whether the blue or orange dots are counted first - same result

But we've always known this stuff, right? I mean, everybody knows that 2+3 is the same as 3+2 (at least I hope)! The same rules fly for multiplication as well.

Of course, the importance of this property goes way beyond grade school math and counting apples or orange and blue dots! Many important proofs in analysis, linear algebra and set theory are founded upon the assumption that the commutative property is legit. This stuff dates way back as well; the Ancient Egyptians were avid users of this property because, at the time, it greatly helped in simplifying some complicated multiplication problems (it's okay, we have calculators for that stuff now!).

And of course, the very idea of the combative property at a fundamental property should not be classified as something strictly in the realm of mathematics; this property manifests itself in our every day lives all of the time! For example, the process of putting on your socks is commutative. It doesn't matter if left or right goes first - the end result is exactly the same! Another example would be eating toast and drinking milk. Assuming your goal was just to finish both and acquire nourishment from them, then your stomach does not care which ones goes down your throat first (of course, some people are picky with this, but we'll disregard that for a moment).

Non-Commutors

Of course, we can't forget the other side of this coin - there are many, many examples of mathematical operations that are non-commutative (i.e. order DOES matter). The most simplest example would be division or subtraction; it is most emphatically untrue that 5/1 is equal to 1/5. We have to be careful of our order in these cases. Other examples of non-commuative operations include cross products (of vectors) and matrix multiplication. 

An example of matrix multiplication

Uncertainty Principle 

So, what does all of this have to do with the uncertainty principle? Well, it turns out that the commutative and non-commutative properties are also very important in quantum mechanics. According to Werner Heisenberg, if two operators (a fancy word for a symbol that tells you to do something to a number - an example would be the differentiation operator, signified by d/dx) are shown to not commute, then those two variables can NOT be measured simultaneously. 

This is due to the fact that order DOES matter when dealing with non-commuters. If you were to attempt to measure the two variables simultaneously, then the order of the measurement isn't really defined - "at the same time" does not classify as an oder of operations. In quantum mechanics, the math shows us that position and linear momentum just do not commute: this is the mathematical reason for why the uncertainty principle exists and why we just have to learn to love with it - you can't beat the math! 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Big Is a Million, Billion and Trillion?

Millons, billions, trillions - we've heard it all, but do we really understand them? Most people know that a trillion is bigger than a million for example, but just how big is the difference really? How about we find out!? Time  Here'a a neat exercise. Without doing any math or calculations, I want you to try to guess how long it was 1 million seconds ago….Okay, got a number in your head? The answer is: 11. 52 days  Hmmm…interesting. But here's the better part. Now that you know how long it was 1 million seconds ago, I want you to guess at how long it was a billion seconds ago…Got it? What did you guess? A month or two? Well, it turns out the answer is: 32 years  Wow! I don't know about you, but I really underestimated that one. If you're under 32, that means you haven't even existed for a billion seconds…and yet, a million seconds was less than two weeks ago. Okay, now that we know that, let's do the same for a trillion. Take a guess…The answ...

6 Weird Animal Defence Mechanisms

There are approximately 8.7 million species on Earth! With that big of a number, you're bound to find some very interesting ones with some very peculiar methods of defending themselves. Humans may have guns and weapons, but most people have nothing on these guys… 6. Frog Breaks Its Own Bones To Stab Enemies  When threatened by predators, a particular type of frog, commonly known as the "Hairy Frog", uses quite the unorthodox method indeed. It has the ability (and audacity) to break its own toe bones  and then push them out of his skins. This frog will then use these sharp bones sticking out its feet as little swords to stab its enemy. Some scientists believe that the frog is able to bring the bones back into his body for healing with its muscles…either way, this frog is pretty crazy.  5. Opossums Play Dead…For Real! We've all heard of the old trick of "playing dead". You're supposed to lay there, secretly pretending to be dead until yo...

8 Arguments Against A Personal God

In this article, I'm going to outline a few "arguments" (they're more like things that seem to contradict a personal god or that make its existence illogical, but whatever) against the existence of a "personal god". But first, what is a personal god? Well, when people say they believe in a god, they mean very different things. Some believe in a deistic god (i.e. some sort of greater force that essentially pushed the start button for the universe, but plays no role in anything after that - he's basically not really there). I am NOT arguing against this kind (maybe in another piece…). The type of god I'm arguing against is the type that I think most "religious" people believe in. These are a list of criteria that make a personal god (in my opinion): Assumptions : 1. This god personally cares about human affairs  2. This god can experience emotions (ex. he "loves" you and "cares" about you)  2. This god created t...