Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0901.4825 · Prespacetime journal

Heisenberg Uncertainty in Reduced Power Algebras

Elemér Elad Rosinger

Published Jan 30, 2009• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The Heisenberg uncertainty relation is known to be obtainable by a purely mathematical argument. Based on that fact, here it is shown that the Heisenberg uncertainty relation remains valid when Quantum Mechanics is re-formulated within far wider frameworks of {\it scalars}, namely, within one or the other of the infinitely many {\it reduced power algebras} which can replace the usual real numbers $\mathbb{R}$, or complex numbers $\mathbb{C}$. A major advantage of such a re-formulation is, among others, the disappearance of the well known and hard to deal with problem of the so called "infinities in Physics". The use of reduced power algebras also opens up a foundational question about the role, and in fact, about the very meaning and existence, of fundamental constants in Physics, such as Planck's constant $h$. A role, meaning, and existence which may, or on the contrary, may not be so objective as to be independent of the scalars used, be they the usual real numbers $\mathbb{R}$, complex numbers $\mathbb{C}$, or scalars given by any of the infinitely many reduced power algebras, algebras which can so easily be constructed and used.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.0901.4825

Related papers

Heisenberg uncertainty in reduced power algebras

Elemér Elad Rosinger

The Heisenberg uncertainty relation is known to be obtainable by a \npurely mathematical argument. Based on that fact, here it is shown \nthat the Heisenberg uncertainty relation remains valid when Quantum \nMechanics is re-formulated within far wider frameworks of scalars, \nnamely, within one or the other of the infinitely many reduced power \nalgebras which can replace the usual real numbers R, or complex numbers \nC. A major advantage of such a re-formulation is, among others, \nthe disappearance of the well known and hard to deal with problem \nof the so called ”infinities in Physics”. The use of reduced power algebras \nalso opens up a foundational question about the role, and in \nfact, about the very meaning and existence, of fundamental constants \nin Physics, such as Planck’s constant h. A role, meaning, and existence \nwhich may, or on the contrary, may not be so objective as to \nbe independent of the scalars used, be they the usual real numbers \nR, complex numbers C, or scalars given by any of the infinitely many \nreduced power algebras, algebras which can so easily be constructed \nand used.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2012•15 citations

The Question of Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle: Inevitable Alternative Interpretations and Applications: Alternative views about Heisenberg uncertainty principle and importance

Ikechukwu Iloh Udema

Background: There has been altercation for and against Heisenberg uncertainty principles, whose earlier mathematical form has assumed other forms. This is despite the fact that the original form ought to be for the hydrogen atom only. Methods: the method is purely theoretical and computational, involving the use of spectroscopic data in the literature. Aim and objectives: The aim of the research was to show that half of reduced Planck’s constant (ℏ/2) cannot be restricted to a lower limit to the product of the uncertainty in the momentum and the uncertainty in the position. The objectives were: 1) to undertake the derivation of an equation unifying the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and atomic principles; and 2) to give evidence that half of the reduced Planck’s constant (ℏ/2) is strictly for hydrogen. Results and discussion: With hydrogen apart from other elements, fractions and multiples of ℏ/2, 0.0053–0.0264 corresponding to the radii ranging between a0/100 and a0/20 (a0 is the Bohr’s radius), and 5-26 corresponding to the radii ranging between 4a0 and 49a0 were demonstrated; the probability of locating the position and momentum increases with decreasing radii. Conclusion: The equations for the determination of the fractions and multiples of ℏ/2 were derived. Computation gave values less than and higher than ℏ/2; the latter was found to be restricted to hydrogen only. The possibility of linking the product of uncertainties in position and momentum to Pa may be reserved for a future study.

•May 14, 2023•0 citations

Anti Heisenberg—Refutation Of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Relation

Ilija Barukčić, Andrei Yu. Khrennikov, Gregg S. Jaeger +2 more

The quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum plays an important role in many treatments on the (philosophical, physical and other) implications of quantum mechanics. Roughly speaking, the more precisely the momentum (position) of a (quantum mechanical) object is given, the less precisely can one say what its position (momentum) is. This quantum mechanical measurement problem is not just an interpretational difficulty, it raises broader issues as well. The measurement (of a property) of a (quantum mechanical) object determines the existence of the measured. In brief, the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle challenges some fundamental principles of Science and especially the principle of causality. In particular, an independently existing (external) objective reality is denied. As we shall see, that the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum is based on the assumption that 1⩽0, which is a logical contradiction.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2011•0 citations

Anti Heisenberg—Refutation Of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Relation

Ilija Barukčić

The quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum plays an important role in many treatments on the (philosophical, physical and other) implications of quantum mechanics. Roughly speaking, the more precisely the momentum (position) of a (quantum mechanical) object is given, the less precisely can one say what its position (momentum) is. This quantum mechanical measurement problem is not just an interpretational difficulty, it raises broader issues as well. The measurement (of a property) of a (quantum mechanical) object determines the existence of the measured. In brief, the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle challenges some fundamental principles of Science and especially the principle of causality. In particular, an independently existing (external) objective reality is denied. As we shall see, that the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum is based on the assumption that 1⩽0, which is a logical contradiction.

AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2011•15 citations

SOME CONSEQUENCES OF A GENERALIZATION TO HEISENBERG ALGEBRA IN QUANTUM ELECTRODYNAMICS

Abel Camacho

In this essay it will be shown that the introduction of a modification to Heisenberg algebra (here this feature means the existence of a minimal observable length), as a fundamental part of the quantization process of the electrodynamical field, renders states in which the uncertainties in the two quadrature components violate the usual Heisenberg uncertainty relation. Hence in this context it may be asserted that any physically realistic generalization of the uncertainty principle must include, not only a minimal observable length, but also a minimal observable momentum.

arXiv:gr-qc/0305052•International Journal of Modern Physics D•Oct 1, 2003•16 citations

Uncertainty relations in quantum theory

René Schwonnek

Uncertainty relations are commonly praised as one of the central pillars of quantum theory. Usually, they are taught in the first weeks of a beginners lecture, and introduced in the ?rst chapters of a textbook. However, their precise operational meaning and a formulation in a general context, i.e. beyond the example of position and momentum observables, are often left out. The reasoning for this is twofold: On one hand, an exact operational definition of uncertainty, indeterminacy and a corresponding uncertainty principle has been the content of many debates since the early days of quantum mechanics until today. From a modern perspective, we have the consent that there are at least the two notions of preparation and measurement uncertainty: the first notion prohibits the existence of dissipation free states and the latter one the existence of error free joint measurements. On the other hand, we have that, the mathematical tools, which are needed for comprehensive treatment of uncertainty relations in a general context, are still under development and usually go far beyond the mathematical level of an introductory course. In this thesis we will investigate these two notions of uncertainty, their corre- sponding uncertainty relations, such as their interplay. The aim of this thesis is to give answers to the central questions: (1.) Which quantities should be used to formulate uncertainty? (2.) How can we compute uncertainty relations for those? (3.) Are there connections between the two notions of uncertainty? We will do this, whenever possible, in a most general context and with a focus on relevant examples, otherwise. Therefore, we will consider constructions of mea- surement errors and deviation measures that quantify uncertainty, based on, so called, cost functions. Commonly used uncertainty measures like variances, en- tropies, and the Hamming distance are examples for these. We will investigate the structure of the corresponding uncertainty relations and provide several methods that enable us to compute them. The third question is addressed by a theorem that shows, for sharp observables, that measurement uncertainty relations can be lower bounded by preparation uncertainty relations, whenever the same cost function is used.

•Jan 1, 2018•3 citations
The Heisenberg uncertainty relation is known to be obtainable by a purely mathematical argument. Based on that fact, here it is shown that the Heisenberg uncertainty relation remains valid when Quantum Mechanics is re-formulated within far wider frameworks of {\it scalars}, namely, within one or the other of the infinitely many {\it reduced power algebras} which can replace the usual real numbers R\mathbb{R}R, or complex numbers C\mathbb{C}C. A major advantage of such a re-formulation is, among others, the disappearance of the well known and hard to deal with problem of the so called "infinities in Physics". The use of reduced power algebras also opens up a foundational question about the role, and in fact, about the very meaning and existence, of fundamental constants in Physics, such as Planck's constant hhh. A role, meaning, and existence which may, or on the contrary, may not be so objective as to be independent of the scalars used, be they the usual real numbers R\mathbb{R}R, complex numbers C\mathbb{C}C, or scalars given by any of the infinitely many reduced power algebras, algebras which can so easily be constructed and used.
The Heisenberg uncertainty relation is known to be obtainable by a \npurely mathematical argument. Based on that fact, here it is shown \nthat the Heisenberg uncertainty relation remains valid when Quantum \nMechanics is re-formulated within far wider frameworks of scalars, \nnamely, within one or the other of the infinitely many reduced power \nalgebras which can replace the usual real numbers R, or complex numbers \nC. A major advantage of such a re-formulation is, among others, \nthe disappearance of the well known and hard to deal with problem \nof the so called ”infinities in Physics”. The use of reduced power algebras \nalso opens up a foundational question about the role, and in \nfact, about the very meaning and existence, of fundamental constants \nin Physics, such as Planck’s constant h. A role, meaning, and existence \nwhich may, or on the contrary, may not be so objective as to \nbe independent of the scalars used, be they the usual real numbers \nR, complex numbers C, or scalars given by any of the infinitely many \nreduced power algebras, algebras which can so easily be constructed \nand used.
Background: There has been altercation for and against Heisenberg uncertainty principles, whose earlier mathematical form has assumed other forms. This is despite the fact that the original form ought to be for the hydrogen atom only. Methods: the method is purely theoretical and computational, involving the use of spectroscopic data in the literature. Aim and objectives: The aim of the research was to show that half of reduced Planck’s constant (ℏ/2) cannot be restricted to a lower limit to the product of the uncertainty in the momentum and the uncertainty in the position. The objectives were: 1) to undertake the derivation of an equation unifying the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and atomic principles; and 2) to give evidence that half of the reduced Planck’s constant (ℏ/2) is strictly for hydrogen. Results and discussion: With hydrogen apart from other elements, fractions and multiples of ℏ/2, 0.0053–0.0264 corresponding to the radii ranging between a0/100 and a0/20 (a0 is the Bohr’s radius), and 5-26 corresponding to the radii ranging between 4a0 and 49a0 were demonstrated; the probability of locating the position and momentum increases with decreasing radii. Conclusion: The equations for the determination of the fractions and multiples of ℏ/2 were derived. Computation gave values less than and higher than ℏ/2; the latter was found to be restricted to hydrogen only. The possibility of linking the product of uncertainties in position and momentum to Pa may be reserved for a future study.
The quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum plays an important role in many treatments on the (philosophical, physical and other) implications of quantum mechanics. Roughly speaking, the more precisely the momentum (position) of a (quantum mechanical) object is given, the less precisely can one say what its position (momentum) is. This quantum mechanical measurement problem is not just an interpretational difficulty, it raises broader issues as well. The measurement (of a property) of a (quantum mechanical) object determines the existence of the measured. In brief, the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle challenges some fundamental principles of Science and especially the principle of causality. In particular, an independently existing (external) objective reality is denied. As we shall see, that the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum is based on the assumption that 1⩽0, which is a logical contradiction.
The quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum plays an important role in many treatments on the (philosophical, physical and other) implications of quantum mechanics. Roughly speaking, the more precisely the momentum (position) of a (quantum mechanical) object is given, the less precisely can one say what its position (momentum) is. This quantum mechanical measurement problem is not just an interpretational difficulty, it raises broader issues as well. The measurement (of a property) of a (quantum mechanical) object determines the existence of the measured. In brief, the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle challenges some fundamental principles of Science and especially the principle of causality. In particular, an independently existing (external) objective reality is denied. As we shall see, that the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum is based on the assumption that 1⩽0, which is a logical contradiction.
In this essay it will be shown that the introduction of a modification to Heisenberg algebra (here this feature means the existence of a minimal observable length), as a fundamental part of the quantization process of the electrodynamical field, renders states in which the uncertainties in the two quadrature components violate the usual Heisenberg uncertainty relation. Hence in this context it may be asserted that any physically realistic generalization of the uncertainty principle must include, not only a minimal observable length, but also a minimal observable momentum.
Uncertainty relations are commonly praised as one of the central pillars of quantum theory. Usually, they are taught in the first weeks of a beginners lecture, and introduced in the ?rst chapters of a textbook. However, their precise operational meaning and a formulation in a general context, i.e. beyond the example of position and momentum observables, are often left out. The reasoning for this is twofold: On one hand, an exact operational definition of uncertainty, indeterminacy and a corresponding uncertainty principle has been the content of many debates since the early days of quantum mechanics until today. From a modern perspective, we have the consent that there are at least the two notions of preparation and measurement uncertainty: the first notion prohibits the existence of dissipation free states and the latter one the existence of error free joint measurements. On the other hand, we have that, the mathematical tools, which are needed for comprehensive treatment of uncertainty relations in a general context, are still under development and usually go far beyond the mathematical level of an introductory course. In this thesis we will investigate these two notions of uncertainty, their corre- sponding uncertainty relations, such as their interplay. The aim of this thesis is to give answers to the central questions: (1.) Which quantities should be used to formulate uncertainty? (2.) How can we compute uncertainty relations for those? (3.) Are there connections between the two notions of uncertainty? We will do this, whenever possible, in a most general context and with a focus on relevant examples, otherwise. Therefore, we will consider constructions of mea- surement errors and deviation measures that quantify uncertainty, based on, so called, cost functions. Commonly used uncertainty measures like variances, en- tropies, and the Hamming distance are examples for these. We will investigate the structure of the corresponding uncertainty relations and provide several methods that enable us to compute them. The third question is addressed by a theorem that shows, for sharp observables, that measurement uncertainty relations can be lower bounded by preparation uncertainty relations, whenever the same cost function is used.