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

Il Nuovo cimento della Società italiana di fisica. B/Il Nuovo cimento B

Wave-particle duality and the de Broglie relation

Dennis K. Ross

Published Sep 1, 1993• 0 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/bf02822866

Related papers

Wave–Particle Duality: De Broglie, Einstein, and Schrödinger

Science & technology education library•Feb 7, 2009•0 citations

Wave/particle duality and de Broglie waves

Carson L. Tang

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Jun 23, 2005•0 citations

Physical Interpretation of de Broglie’s Wave Particle Duality Relation in a Phonon

Arijit Bag

Using Planck’s postulates for black body radiation and wave particle duality relation of de Broglie we can get a relation between mass of a phonon and emission frequency of a body at different temperatures. Using boundary condition lower limit of mass of a phonon is calculated which is 7.36 × 10^{−51} kg.

•Dec 1, 2017•0 citations

De Broglie Waves: Are Electrons Waves or Particles?

Muhammad Suhail Zubairy

In 1924, de Broglie postulated that particles can behave like waves, thus complementing the observation by Einstein in 1905 that light can behave like particles. This wave–particle duality aspect for both particles and waves had a deep impact on the subsequent development of quantum mechanics. Some highly counterintuitive results, like the Heisenberg uncertainty relation and the Bose–Einstein condensation, that were motivated by wave–particle duality are discussed in this chapter. Following de Broglie’s hypothesis, a wave packet description for a particle is described. An analysis of the Heisenberg microscope is presented, thus motivating the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. The Davisson–Germer experiment that showed that electrons can behave like waves and the Compton effect that provided early conclusive evidence that light can behave like particles are also discussed.

Oxford University Press eBooks•May 7, 2020•0 citations

Wave-Particle Duality: A Modern View

Bruce R. Wheaton

Compendium of Quantum Physics•Jan 1, 2009•0 citations

From duality to complementarity

Dugald R. Murdoch

Bohr's response in 1925 to the failure of the Bohr–Kramers–Slater theory was, as we have seen, to regard wave–particle duality as having a formal, rather than realistic, significance; he saw it as a ‘limitation of our usual means of visualization’. That same year, however, wave–particle duality was generalised by Louis-Victor de Broglie to cover the theory of matter. Moreover, the advent of quantum mechanics (i.e. matrix mechanics and wave mechanics), rather than dispelling the duality problem, heightened it. How did Bohr respond to these new developments in the quantum theory? A matter of waves In the autumn of 1923 de Broglie put forward the extremely bold hypothesis that any particle whatever is associated with a wave whose wavelength λ and frequency ν are proportional to the particle's momentum and energy respectively: λ = h / p , v = E / h . De Broglie regarded his hypothesis as the basis of a new mechanics, a wave mechanics related to classical mechanics in the same way as wave optics is related to ray optics. On this view the trajectory of a particle corresponds to the ray of the wave associated with it (i.e. the normal to the equiphase surface of the wave), and the velocity of the particle corresponds to the group velocity of the wave. De Broglie suggested, moreover, that in certain circumstances particles should exhibit diffraction effects: a stream of electrons, for example, which passes through a slit in a screen should undergo diffraction.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 5, 1987•1 citation
In 1924, de Broglie postulated that particles can behave like waves, thus complementing the observation by Einstein in 1905 that light can behave like particles. This wave–particle duality aspect for both particles and waves had a deep impact on the subsequent development of quantum mechanics. Some highly counterintuitive results, like the Heisenberg uncertainty relation and the Bose–Einstein condensation, that were motivated by wave–particle duality are discussed in this chapter. Following de Broglie’s hypothesis, a wave packet description for a particle is described. An analysis of the Heisenberg microscope is presented, thus motivating the Heisenberg uncertainty relation. The Davisson–Germer experiment that showed that electrons can behave like waves and the Compton effect that provided early conclusive evidence that light can behave like particles are also discussed.
Bohr's response in 1925 to the failure of the Bohr–Kramers–Slater theory was, as we have seen, to regard wave–particle duality as having a formal, rather than realistic, significance; he saw it as a ‘limitation of our usual means of visualization’. That same year, however, wave–particle duality was generalised by Louis-Victor de Broglie to cover the theory of matter. Moreover, the advent of quantum mechanics (i.e. matrix mechanics and wave mechanics), rather than dispelling the duality problem, heightened it. How did Bohr respond to these new developments in the quantum theory? A matter of waves In the autumn of 1923 de Broglie put forward the extremely bold hypothesis that any particle whatever is associated with a wave whose wavelength λ and frequency ν are proportional to the particle's momentum and energy respectively: λ = h / p , v = E / h . De Broglie regarded his hypothesis as the basis of a new mechanics, a wave mechanics related to classical mechanics in the same way as wave optics is related to ray optics. On this view the trajectory of a particle corresponds to the ray of the wave associated with it (i.e. the normal to the equiphase surface of the wave), and the velocity of the particle corresponds to the group velocity of the wave. De Broglie suggested, moreover, that in certain circumstances particles should exhibit diffraction effects: a stream of electrons, for example, which passes through a slit in a screen should undergo diffraction.