My name is Alexander FufaeV and here I will explain the following topic:

Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

Formula

What do the formula symbols mean?

Location uncertainty

Unit
The position $$x$$ of a particle is in the range between $$x-\Delta x$$ and $$x+\Delta x$$ because of the measurement uncertainty.

Pulse uncertainty

Unit
According to the uncertainty relation, the momentum $$p$$ of the particle must have at least the deviation $$\Delta p$$ which is given in principle by $$\Delta x$$ and the Planck's constant $$h$$. The momentum of the particle lies in the interval between $$p-\Delta p$$ and $$p+\Delta p$$ and this interval cannot be decreased.

Planck's Constant

Unit
Planck's is a physical constant (of quantum mechanics) and has the value: $$h ~=~ 6.626 \cdot 10^{-34} \, \text{Js}$$.
Explanation

Video

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that it is impossible to determine two complementary quantities (such as position $$x$$ and momentum $$p$$) simultaneously with any accuracy. The more precisely the position $$x$$ of a particle is measured, the less accurate the simultaneous measurement of its momentum $$p$$ becomes and vice versa.

The Heisenberg relation brings the maximum deviation $$\Delta x$$ of the position and the maximum deviation $$\Delta p$$ of the momentum into play. This means: If you measure the position $$x$$ of a particle and its momentum $$p$$ in the experiment, then the two values are not exact. The particle is not exactly at $$x$$, but somewhere between $$x - \Delta x$$ and $$x + \Delta x$$. In the same way, the momentum of the particle is not exactly $$p$$, but lies between $$p - \Delta p$$ and $$p + \Delta p$$. $$\Delta x$$ and $$\Delta p$$ are therefore errors predetermined by nature that are unavoidable, no matter how precise you make the experiment. This indicates that nature on a microscopic level is completely different from everyday physics.

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle states that the product of the errors $$\Delta x$$ and $$\Delta p$$ can never be smaller than $$h / 4\pi = 5.25 \cdot 10^{-35 } \, \mathrm{Js}$$:

Formula anchor

Uncertainty Relation Using a Single Slit

Consider a single slit with width $$\Delta x$$. A straight electron beam is sent onto this single slit. Each electron in the beam has a momentum $$p_{\text y}$$ in the $$y$$ direction, which is directed exactly to the single slit. In this way, the electrons can cross the slit.

We choose the slit width $$\Delta x$$ so that there is electron diffraction at the single slit. As a result, we can observe an interference pattern on the detector screen behind the single slit. It has a main maximum in the center and smaller secondary maxima around it. Obviously, after passing through the slit, the electrons have received a momentum in the $$x$$ direction. If this were not the case, we would only observe one fringe exactly in the center of the detector screen.

We do not know how large the momentum component of the electron is in the $$x$$ direction, because we do not know where exactly the electron will land on the screen once it has crossed the single slit.

We can look at the detector screen and see that the farther the electron fringes are on the screen, the larger the momentum deviation $$\Delta p_{\text x}$$ must be. This is the $$x$$-component of the momentum $$p$$, which was not present BEFORE crossing the slit. We refer to the deviation from $$p_{\text y}$$ as $$\Delta p_{\text x}$$ (momentum uncertainty).

With the help of illustration 1 we can establish the first of the two equations that will lead us to the Heisenberg uncertainty relation.

Condition #1

Let's look at the deviation $$\Delta p_{\text x}$$ up to the 1st minimum. Then we can construct the following right triangle using the illustration:

• The hypotenuse $$p$$ - as the total momentum of the electron after crossing the single slit.

• The opposing cathetus $$\Delta p_{\text x}$$ - as a deviation from the momentum component $$p_{\text y}$$.

• The adjacent cathetus $$p_{\text y}$$ - as the initial total momentum of the electron before crossing the single slit.

The angle enclosed between $$p$$ and $$p_{\text y}$$ is $$\theta$$. The trigonometric relation holds: sine of the angle is opposing cathetus divided by hypotenuse:

Formula anchor

Condition #2

Let's still eliminate the angle $$\theta$$ in 1 and bring the slit width $$\Delta x$$ into play. The slit width $$\Delta x$$ restricts the location of the electrons to the region $$\Delta x$$ and is important for the uncertainty relation.

For this we use the right triangle in illustration 2.

Here, $$n\lambda$$ is the phase difference of two electron waves at the single slit, which in our case lead to the 1st minimum. Note that for the single slit, the condition for destructive interference (that is, a minimum on the screen) is a multiple of the wavelength $$n \,\lambda$$. At the double slit $$n\,\lambda$$ was a condition for constructive interference. Here, $$n$$ takes the values 1, 2, 3, ... and so on and stands for the 1st minimum, 2nd minimum and so on.

We read off the following relation from illustration 2 (again: sine is opposing cathetus divided by hypotenuse):

Formula anchor

Let's link the two conditions by substituting the sine 2 into equation 3:

Formula anchor

Now we have to somehow bring in the Planck's constant $$h$$, because it occurs in the uncertainty relation. We do this by using the matter wavelength $$\lambda$$ (de Broglie wavelength) of electrons:

Formula anchor

Using the de Broglie relation 5, let us substitute the wavelength $$\lambda$$ into Eq. 6:

Formula anchor

Thus we have eliminated the angle $$\theta$$. The momentum $$p$$ also cancels out:

Formula anchor

We are almost at our final result. Bring $$\Delta x$$ and $$n$$ to the other side:

Formula anchor

To get an inequality, we compare Eq. 8 with the following term for the 1st minimum ($$n=1$$): $$\Delta p_{\text x} \, \Delta x$$. Obviously, the left-hand side of Eq. 8 is smaller than $$\Delta p_{\text x} \, \Delta x$$ (or equal if $$n=1$$) (because we divide by a number $$n$$ that is greater than or equal to 1). So we can write:

Formula anchor

If we omit the middle term, we get the following inequality:

Formula anchor

For example, from Eq. 10 we can directly read off what happens when we decrease the gap width $$\Delta x$$. If the slit width is made smaller, the momentum deviation $$\Delta p_{\text x}$$ must increase so that the right side in 10 always remains larger than $$h$$. This in turn means that the interference pattern becomes more extended. The electron momentum after crossing the slit deviates more strongly from the initial momentum $$p_{\text y}$$.

If, on the other hand, you make the slit wider, the position of the electrons is less determined, and the momentum uncertainty $$\Delta p_{\text x}$$ decreases. The interference pattern becomes narrower. If the slit width $$\Delta x$$ is sufficiently large, the interference pattern disappears and all electrons end up in the center of the screen, like classical particles.

Note also that the derived Heisenberg uncertainty relation 10 can occur with a slightly different factor on the right-hand side than with the usual factor $$h/4\pi$$. Important here is the order of magnitude! While $$h$$ is in the order of magnitude $$10^{-34}$$, $$h/4\pi$$ is in the order of magnitude $$10^{-35}$$. So the factor does not make a big difference!