On 03-Feb-13 5:10 PM, Absolutely Vertical wrote:
> On 2/2/2013 6:35 AM, Uwe Hayek wrote:
>> On 02-Feb-13 1:00 AM, Ryan Scott wrote:
>>> Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Uwe Hayek <hayektt@nospam.xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> [snip]
>>>> 
>>>>> I think the best way to model it, is to break it down in subsequent
>>>>> quantum jumps.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The photons will cause some electrons to jump from one atom to the
>>>>> other. When there are a lot of photons, we have a lot of jumps, what we
>>>>> call a current. Some of these jumps are not from outer orbital to outer
>>>>> orbital, but hit the atom mid-ship, that causes vibration, which is
>>>>> emitted as heat-photons. Just like an ordinary current in an ordinary
>>>>> conductor. Everything is Quantum Mechanic, at the atomic level.
>>>> 
>>>> Everything looks like a nail, to a hammer:
>>>>  http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001361111/gwbush_answer_4_xlarge.jpeg
>>>> Dirk Vdm
>>> 
>>> i never understood how an 10?¹° m atom give rise to a say 4x10?7 m
>>> wavelength light wave
>>> 
>> 
>> It is Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle : mass*speed*distance < hbar/2
>> 
> 
> you could at least quote heisenberg's uncertainty principle correctly.
> there are at least three obvious mistakes in what you wrote.
> 1. it is the spread in momentum and position, not the values of them

Spread of the distance ?
Gee, I thought distance was a spread.

> 2. less than should be greater than

Depends on what you want to define : certainty or uncertainty.

> 3. the momentum is more general than mass*speed

And more confusing.

I have my reasons to write it that way.

Written like this, it becomes a universal rule, a border between the
inertial world of GR and the non inertial uncertainty.

We are sitting in an inertial world, and can only do certain
measurements with certain parameters : that is the reason for the
conjugate variables.

The pure uncertainty is impossible to measure, something that has no
inertia, has no impact. You cannot hit anything with an object that has
no inertia.

Then, what do we measure ? Every measurement collapses the wave
function, and makes it an inertial fact.

We can not measure anything of an electron in an hydrogen atom.
It is pure uncertainty.

The exercise here is not to parrot the hup, but to try and understand
what it means. Same for relativity.

I use this analogy : before an owl or a cat can spot a mouse, there are
some conditions to be met :

1-the mouse has to be large enough to be seen.
2-it has to move for a certain distance
3-it has to move at a certain speed.

Only then will the cat or owl react and catch the mouse.

For the HUP : inertia kicks in when mass * speed * distance > hbar/2

When these conditions are not met, then there is no inertia, and the
particle can do pretty much what it wants. Go FTL, for instance.

If my aim was to parrot the hup, I could have copy pasted it from
Wikipedia, and practice your favorite sport of "look how wonderfully
exact I can copy/parrot/paste from a textbook".

I practice another game, so do not judge me with parrot points.

Surprise me, by at least trying to entertain my interpretation, and to
criticize it with some real, physical arguments.

Uwe Hayek.