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

Science

Remarks on Uncertainty Principles

E. U. Condon

Published May 31, 1929• 15 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Since the publication of Heisenberg’s paper1 on the “anschaulichen Inhalt” of quantum mechanics, discussions of the fundamental limitations on the accuracy of physical measurements have been much in the foreground. According to Heisenberg, the quantum mechanics implies that it is impossible to measure simultaneous values of a coordinate and its conjugate momentum with unlimited precision. Instead, if Δp be the estimated error or uncertainty in a momentum and Δq that in the associated coordinate one must have the inequality, $$ \Delta p\Delta q>\frac{h}{{2\pi}} $$ (1) This inequality has come to be known quite generally as Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation.

DOI
10.1126/science.69.1796.573

Related papers

Quantum Measurement Bounds beyond the Uncertainty Relations

Vittorio Giovannetti, Seth Lloyd, Lorenzo Maccone

In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relations and the Cramér-Rao inequalities typically limit the precision in the estimation of a parameter through the standard deviation of a conjugate observable. Here we extend these relations by giving a bound to the precision of a parameter in terms of the expectation value of the conjugate observable. This has both foundational and practical consequences: in quantum optics it resolves a controversy over which is the ultimate precision in interferometry.

arXiv:1109.5661•Physical Review Letters•Jun 26, 2012•70 citations

An uncertain world!

Muhammad Suhail Zubairy

Abstract One of the foundational principles of quantum mechanics is Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation. According to this relation, no one can measure both the position of a particle and how fast it is moving simultaneously no matter how precise the measuring instruments. Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation and the associated Bohr’s principle of complementarity are explained using simple examples. The idea that measurement disturbs the system is a source of the uncertainty. The philosophical question whether the uncertainty represents only our inability to measure the properties precisely or it has much deeper consequences related to the question of reality is also discussed.

•Sep 14, 2023•0 citations

Exploring the implications of the uncertainty relationships in quantum mechanics

Huai‐Yu Wang

Heisenberg guessed, after he established the matrix quantum mechanics, that the non-commutativity of the matrices of position and momentum implied that the position and momentum of a particle could not be precisely simultaneously determined. He consequently conjectured that time and energy should also have a similar relationship. Soon after, Robertson derived an inequality concerning the space coordinate and momentum, which was thought to be the mathematical expression of the uncertainty relation guessed by Heisenberg. Since then, people have tried various devices to prove the correctness of these two relations. However, no one conducted a careful analysis of Heisenberg’s primary paper. In this work, we point out some serious problems in Heisenberg’s paper and the literature talking about the uncertainty relationships: the physical concepts involved in the uncertainty relations are not clear; one physical concept had more than one explanation, i.e., switching concepts; there has never been measurement experiment to support the relations. The conclusions are that the so-called coordinate–momentum uncertainty relation has never been related to actual measurement and there does not exist a time–energy uncertainty relation.

Frontiers in Physics•Dec 8, 2022•3 citations

Uncertainty Relations

Kenjiro Yanagi

Uncertainty relations are inequalities representing the impossibility of simultaneous measurement in quantum mechanics. The most well-known uncertainty relations were presented by Heisenberg and Schrödinger. In this chapter, we generalize and extend them to produce several types of uncertainty relations.

IntechOpen eBooks•May 6, 2020•0 citations

Measurement uncertainty: the problem of characterising optimal error bounds

Tom Bullock, Paul Busch

In standard formulations of the uncertainty principle, two fundamental features are typically cast as impossibility statements: two noncommuting observables cannot in general both be sharply defined (for the same state), nor can they be measured jointly. The pioneers of quantum mechanics were acutely aware and puzzled by this fact, and it motivated Heisenberg to seek a mitigation, which he formulated in his seminal paper of 1927. He provided intuitive arguments to show that the values of, say, the position and momentum of a particle can at least be unsharply defined, and they can be measured together provided some approximation errors are allowed. Only now, nine decades later, a working theory of approximate joint measurements is taking shape, leading to rigorous and experimentally testable formulations of associated error tradeoff relations. Here we briefly review this new development, explaining the concepts and steps taken in the construction of optimal joint approximations of pairs of incompatible observables. As a case study, we deduce measurement uncertainty relations for qubit observables using two distinct error measures. We provide an operational interpretation of the error bounds and discuss some of the first experimental tests of such relations.

•Dec 1, 2015•1 citation

Quantum Mechanics from a Heisenberg-type Equality

Michael J. W. Hall, Marcel Reginatto

The usual Heisenberg uncertainty relation, ΔX ΔP ≥ ℏ/2, may be replaced by an exact equality for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wavefunctions. This exactuncertainty relation, δX ΔPnc ≡ ℏ/2, can be generalised to other pairs of conjugate observables such as photon number and phase, and is sufficiently strong to provide the basis for moving from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics. In particular, the assumption of a nonclassical momentum fluctuation, having a strength which scales inversely with uncertainty in position, leads from the classical equations of motion to the Schrödinger equation.

arXiv:quant-ph/0201084•Fortschritte der Physik•May 1, 2002•20 citations
Since the publication of Heisenberg’s paper1 on the “anschaulichen Inhalt” of quantum mechanics, discussions of the fundamental limitations on the accuracy of physical measurements have been much in the foreground. According to Heisenberg, the quantum mechanics implies that it is impossible to measure simultaneous values of a coordinate and its conjugate momentum with unlimited precision. Instead, if Δp be the estimated error or uncertainty in a momentum and Δq that in the associated coordinate one must have the inequality,
ΔpΔq>h2π\Delta p\Delta q>\frac{h}{{2\pi}}ΔpΔq>2πh​
(1)
This inequality has come to be known quite generally as Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation.
In quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg uncertainty relations and the Cramér-Rao inequalities typically limit the precision in the estimation of a parameter through the standard deviation of a conjugate observable. Here we extend these relations by giving a bound to the precision of a parameter in terms of the expectation value of the conjugate observable. This has both foundational and practical consequences: in quantum optics it resolves a controversy over which is the ultimate precision in interferometry.
Abstract One of the foundational principles of quantum mechanics is Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation. According to this relation, no one can measure both the position of a particle and how fast it is moving simultaneously no matter how precise the measuring instruments. Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation and the associated Bohr’s principle of complementarity are explained using simple examples. The idea that measurement disturbs the system is a source of the uncertainty. The philosophical question whether the uncertainty represents only our inability to measure the properties precisely or it has much deeper consequences related to the question of reality is also discussed.
Heisenberg guessed, after he established the matrix quantum mechanics, that the non-commutativity of the matrices of position and momentum implied that the position and momentum of a particle could not be precisely simultaneously determined. He consequently conjectured that time and energy should also have a similar relationship. Soon after, Robertson derived an inequality concerning the space coordinate and momentum, which was thought to be the mathematical expression of the uncertainty relation guessed by Heisenberg. Since then, people have tried various devices to prove the correctness of these two relations. However, no one conducted a careful analysis of Heisenberg’s primary paper. In this work, we point out some serious problems in Heisenberg’s paper and the literature talking about the uncertainty relationships: the physical concepts involved in the uncertainty relations are not clear; one physical concept had more than one explanation, i.e., switching concepts; there has never been measurement experiment to support the relations. The conclusions are that the so-called coordinate–momentum uncertainty relation has never been related to actual measurement and there does not exist a time–energy uncertainty relation.
In standard formulations of the uncertainty principle, two fundamental features are typically cast as impossibility statements: two noncommuting observables cannot in general both be sharply defined (for the same state), nor can they be measured jointly. The pioneers of quantum mechanics were acutely aware and puzzled by this fact, and it motivated Heisenberg to seek a mitigation, which he formulated in his seminal paper of 1927. He provided intuitive arguments to show that the values of, say, the position and momentum of a particle can at least be unsharply defined, and they can be measured together provided some approximation errors are allowed. Only now, nine decades later, a working theory of approximate joint measurements is taking shape, leading to rigorous and experimentally testable formulations of associated error tradeoff relations. Here we briefly review this new development, explaining the concepts and steps taken in the construction of optimal joint approximations of pairs of incompatible observables. As a case study, we deduce measurement uncertainty relations for qubit observables using two distinct error measures. We provide an operational interpretation of the error bounds and discuss some of the first experimental tests of such relations.
The usual Heisenberg uncertainty relation, ΔX ΔP ≥ ℏ/2, may be replaced by an exact equality for suitably chosen measures of position and momentum uncertainty, which is valid for all wavefunctions. This exactuncertainty relation, δX ΔPnc ≡ ℏ/2, can be generalised to other pairs of conjugate observables such as photon number and phase, and is sufficiently strong to provide the basis for moving from classical mechanics to quantum mechanics. In particular, the assumption of a nonclassical momentum fluctuation, having a strength which scales inversely with uncertainty in position, leads from the classical equations of motion to the Schrödinger equation.