uncertainty principle is untenable !!!

[aasci at xs4all.nl]

i agree;
certainty is just perfect...



> UNCERTAINTY  PRINCIPLE
>
> IS
>
> UNTENABLE
>
>
>
> By reanalysing the experiment of Heisenberg Gamma-Ray Microscope and
> one of ideal experiment from which uncertainty principle is derived ,
> it is found that actually uncertainty principle can not be obtained
> from these two ideal experiments . And it is found that uncertainty
> principle is untenable.
>
>
>
> Key words :
>
> uncertainty principle; experiment of Heisenberg Gamma-Ray Microscope;
> ideal experiment
>
>
>
>
>
> Ideal  Experiment  1
>
> Experiment  of  Heisenberg Gamma-Ray  Microscope
>
>
>
> A free electron sits directly beneath the center of the microscope's
> lens (see the picture below or AIP page:
> http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p08b.htm). The circular lens
> forms a cone of angle 2A from the electron. The electron is then
> illuminated from the left by gamma rays--high energy light which has
> the shortest wavelength. These yield the highest resolution, for
> according to a principle of wave optics, the microscope can resolve
> (that is, "see" or distinguish) objects to a size of dx, which is
> related to and to the wavelength L of the gamma ray, by the
> expression:
>
> dx = L/(2sinA)                                   (1)
>
> However, in quantum mechanics, where a light wave can act like a
> particle, a gamma ray striking an electron gives it a kick. At the
> moment the light is diffracted by the electron into the microscope
> lens, the electron is thrust to the right. To be observed by the
> microscope, the gamma ray must be scattered into any angle within the
> cone of angle 2A. In quantum mechanics, the gamma ray carries
> momentum, as if it were a particle. The total momentum p is related
> to the wavelength by the formula
>
>   p = h / L, where h is Planck's constant.               (2)
>
> In the extreme case of diffraction of the gamma ray to the right edge
> of the lens, the total momentum in the x direction would be the sum
> of the electron's momentum P'x in the x direction and the gamma ray's
> momentum in the x direction:
>
>          P'x + (h sinA) / L', where L' is the wavelength of the
> deflected gamma ray.
>
> In the other extreme, the observed gamma ray recoils backward, just
> hitting the left edge of the lens. In this case, the total momentum
> in the x direction is:
>
>        P''x - (h sinA) / L''.
>
> The final x momentum in each case must equal the initial x momentum,
> since momentum is never lost (it is conserved). Therefore, the final
> x momenta are equal to each other:
>
> P'x + (h sinA) / L' = P''x - (h sinA) / L''              (3)
>
> If A is small, then the wavelengths are approximately the same,
>
> L' ~ L" ~ L. So we have
>
> P''x - P'x = dPx ~ 2h sinA / L                     (4)
>
> Since dx = L/(2 sinA), we obtain a reciprocal relationship between
> the minimum uncertainty in the measured position,dx, of the electron
> along the x axis and the uncertainty in its momentum, dPx, in the x
> direction:
>
> dPx ~ h / dx    or   dPx dx ~ h.               (5)
>
> For more than minimum uncertainty, the "greater than" sign may added.
>
> Except for the factor of 4pi and an equal sign, this is Heisenberg's
> uncertainty relation for the simultaneous measurement of the position
> and momentum of an object
>
>      .
>
> Reanalysis
>
> To be seen by the microscope, the gamma ray must be scattered into
> any angle within the cone of angle 2A.
>
> The microscope can resolve (that is, "see" or distinguish) objects to
> a size of dx, which is related to and to the wavelength L of the
> gamma ray, by the expression:
>
> dx = L/(2sinA)                                   (1)
>
> It is the resolving limit of the microscope, and it is the uncertain
> quantity of the object's position.
>
> Microscope can not see the object which the size is smaller than its
> resolving limit dx.
>
> Therefore, to be seen by the microscope, the size of the electron
> must be larger than the resolving limit dx or equal to the resolving
> limit dx.
>
> But if the size of the electron is larger than or equal to the
> resolving limit dx, electron will not be in the range dx. dx can not
> be deemed to be the uncertain quantity of the electron's position
> which can be seen by microscope, dx can be deemed to be the uncertain
> quantity of the electron's position which can not be seen by
> microscope only.
>
> dx is the position's uncertain quantity of the electron which can not
>
> be seen by microscope
>
> To be seen by the microscope, the gamma ray must be scattered into
> any angle within the cone of angle 2A, so we can measure the
>
> momentum of the electron.
>
> dPx is the momentum's uncertain quantity of the electron which can be
> seen by microscope.
>
> What relates to dx is the electron which the size is smaller than the
>
> resolving limit .The electron is in the range dx, it can not be seen
> by the microscope, so its position is uncertain.
>
> What relates to dPx is the electron which the size is larger than or
> equal to the resolving limit .The electron is not in the range dx, it
> can be seen by the microscope, so its position is certain.
>
> Therefore, the electron which relate to dx and dPx respectively is
> not the same.
>
> What we can see is the electron which the size is larger than or
> equal to the resolving limit dx and has certain position, dx = 0..
>
> Quantum mechanics does not relate to the size of the object. but on
> the Experiment Of Heisenberg Gamma-Ray Microscope, the using of the
> microscope must relate to the size of the object, the size of the
> object which can be seen by the microscope must be larger than or
> equal to the resolving limit dx of the microscope, thus it does not
> exist alleged the uncertain quantity of the electron's position dx.
>
> To be seen by the microscope, none but the size of the electron is
> larger than or equal to the resolving limit dx, the gamma ray which
> diffracted by the electron can be scattered into any angle within the
> cone of angle 2A, we can measure the momentum of the electron.
>
> What we can see is the electron which has certain position, dx = 0,
> so that none but dx = 0£¨we can measure the momentum of the electron.
>
> In Quantum mechanics, the momentum of the electron can be measured
> accurately when we measure the momentum of the electron only,
> therefore, we can gained dPx = 0.
>
> Therefore ,
>
> dPx dx =0.                                     (6)
>
>
>
>
>
> Ideal experiment 2
>
> Experiment of single slit diffraction
>
>
>
> Supposing a particle moves in Y direction originally and then passes
> a slit with width dx . So the uncertain quantity of the particle
> position in X direction is dx (see the picture below) , and
> interference occurs at the back slit . According to Wave Optics , the
> angle where No.1 min of interference pattern is , can be calculated
> by following formula :
>
> sinA=L/2dx                                     (1)
>
> and
>
> L=h/p          where h is Planck°Øs constant.       (2)
>
> So uncertainty principle can be obtained
>
> dPx dx ~ h                                    (5)
>
>
>
> Reanalysis
>
> According to Newton first law , if the external force at the X
> direction does not affect particle ,the particle will keep the
> uniform straight line Motion State or Static State , and the motion
> at the Y direction unchangeable .Therefore , we can lead its position
> in the slit form its starting point .
>
> The particle can have the certain position in the slit, and the
> uncertain quantity of the position dx =0 .
>
> According to Newton first law , if the external force at the X
> direction does not affect particle,and the original motion at the Y
> direction is unchangeable , the momentum of the particle at the X
> direction will be Px=0 , and the uncertain quantity of the momentum
> will be dPx =0.
>
> Get:
>
> dPx dx =0.                                     (6)
>
> It has not any experiment to negate NEWTON FIRST LAW, in spite of
> quantum mechanics or classical mechanics, NEWTON FIRST LAW can be the
> same with the microcosmic world.
>
> Under the above ideal experiment , it considered that slit°Øs width
> is the uncertain quantity of the particle°Øs position. But there is
> no reason for us to consider that the particle in the above
> experiment have position°Øs uncertain quantity certainly, and no
> reason for us to consider that the slit°Øs width is the uncertain
> quantity of the particle°Øs position.
>
> Therefore,  uncertainty principle
>
> dPx dx ~ h                                      (5)
>
> which is derived from the above experiment is unreasonable .
>
>
>
> Concluson
>
>>From the above reanalysis , it is realized that the ideal experiment
>>demonstration for uncertainty principle is untenable .
>
> uncertainty principle is untenable.                      .
>
>
>
> Reference book :
>
> 1.   Max Jammer. (1974)  The philosophy of quantum mechanics  (John
> wiley & sons , Inc New York )   Page 65
>
> 2.  Max Jammer. (1974)  The philosophy of quantum mechanics  (John
> wiley & sons , Inc New York )   Page 67
>
> http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p08b.htm
>
>
>
> Author  :   Gong BingXin
>
> Address :   P.O.Box A111 YongFa XiaoQu XinHua HuaDu
>
>           GuangZhou 510800 P.R.China
>
> E-mail  :   hdgbyi at public.guangzhou.gd.cn
>
> Tel:        86°*20---86856616
>
> -----Syndicate mailinglist-----------------------
> Syndicate network for media culture and media art
> information and archive: http://anart.no/~syndicate
> to post to the Syndicate list: <syndicate at anart.no>
> Shake the KKnut: http://anart.no/~syndicate/KKnut
> no commercial use of the texts without permission