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

Journal of consciousness exploration & research

Uncertainty Principle in Light of the “Weak” Measurement Experiments

Jack H. Hiller

Published Nov 1, 2020• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Abstract

Four recent experiments have been published that employed “weak” measurements. The techniques for inferring particle reality by observation were so delicate that the particles were not affected by the energy of observation (except in one experiment), yet the particles were found to have real existence. In this article, the author argues that the results of these contemporary experiments contradict the premise of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.

Related papers

On the Natural State of Subatomic Particles: Implications for Superposition & Quantum Entanglement

Jack H. Hiller

Five recent experiments employed “weak” measurement of subatomic particles by “low energy” techniques. The techniques for inferring particle status by observation were so delicate that the particles were not affected by the energy of observation, and the particles were found to have a definite and real existence, instead of hazy probability distributions. Such observations by weak measurement seem to invalidate the premise of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle (HUP). While the HUP and the Schrodinger wave equation serve to accurately model particle behavior when energetically measured, the particles before their energetic observations had been philosophically speculated to be in a probability distribution which is now contradicted by the five experiments. So, it seems that the superposition principle could be in error. Further, quantum entanglement may not require instantaneous “spooky” signaling, because paired particles acquire complementary features required by conservation of energy.

Journal of consciousness exploration & research•Sep 13, 2022•0 citations

Uncertainty in Quantum Measurements

David Deutsch

The object of this Letter is to show that except in the case of canonically conjugate observables, the generalized Heisenberg inequality does not properly express the quantum uncertainty principle. It is, in general, too weak. An inequality is obtained which does express the principle.

Physical Review Letters•Feb 28, 1983•908 citations

Violation of Heisenberg’s Measurement-Disturbance Relationship by Weak Measurements

Lee A. Rozema, Ardavan Darabi, Dylan H. Mahler +3 more

While there is a rigorously proven relationship about uncertainties intrinsic to any quantum system, often referred to as "Heisenberg's uncertainty principle," Heisenberg originally formulated his ideas in terms of a relationship between the precision of a measurement and the disturbance it must create. Although this latter relationship is not rigorously proven, it is commonly believed (and taught) as an aspect of the broader uncertainty principle. Here, we experimentally observe a violation of Heisenberg's "measurement-disturbance relationship", using weak measurements to characterize a quantum system before and after it interacts with a measurement apparatus. Our experiment implements a 2010 proposal of Lund and Wiseman to confirm a revised measurement-disturbance relationship derived by Ozawa in 2003. Its results have broad implications for the foundations of quantum mechanics and for practical issues in quantum measurement.

arXiv:1208.0034•Physical Review Letters•Sep 6, 2012•308 citations

Quantum Limits in Nanomechanical Systems

Elias P. Gyftopoulos

In two articles, the authors claim that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle limits the precision of simultaneous measurements of the position and velocity of a particle and refer to experimental evidence that supports their claim. It is true that ever since the inception of quantum mechanics, the uncertainty relation that corresponds to a pair of observables represented by non-commuting operators is interpreted by many scientists and engineers, including Heisenberg himself, as a limitation on the accuracy with which observables can be measured. However, such a limitation cannot be deduced from the postulates and theorems of quantum thermodynamics.

arXiv:0707.1638•Jul 11, 2007•1 citation

Uncertainty in quantum mechanics: faith or fantasy?

Roger Penrose

The word 'uncertainty', in the context of quantum mechanics, usually evokes an impression of an essential unknowability of what might actually be going on at the quantum level of activity, as is made explicit in Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and in the fact that the theory normally provides only probabilities for the results of quantum measurement. These issues limit our ultimate understanding of the behaviour of things, if we take quantum mechanics to represent an absolute truth. But they do not cause us to put that very 'truth' into question. This article addresses the issue of quantum 'uncertainty' from a different perspective, raising the question of whether this term might be applied to the theory itself, despite its unrefuted huge success over an enormously diverse range of observed phenomena. There are, indeed, seeming internal contradictions in the theory that lead us to infer that a total faith in it at all levels of scale leads us to almost fantastical implications.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences•Oct 31, 2011•31 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
Four recent experiments have been published that employed “weak” measurements. The techniques for inferring particle reality by observation were so delicate that the particles were not affected by the energy of observation (except in one experiment), yet the particles were found to have real existence. In this article, the author argues that the results of these contemporary experiments contradict the premise of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle.
Five recent experiments employed “weak” measurement of subatomic particles by “low energy” techniques. The techniques for inferring particle status by observation were so delicate that the particles were not affected by the energy of observation, and the particles were found to have a definite and real existence, instead of hazy probability distributions. Such observations by weak measurement seem to invalidate the premise of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle (HUP). While the HUP and the Schrodinger wave equation serve to accurately model particle behavior when energetically measured, the particles before their energetic observations had been philosophically speculated to be in a probability distribution which is now contradicted by the five experiments. So, it seems that the superposition principle could be in error. Further, quantum entanglement may not require instantaneous “spooky” signaling, because paired particles acquire complementary features required by conservation of energy.
While there is a rigorously proven relationship about uncertainties intrinsic to any quantum system, often referred to as "Heisenberg's uncertainty principle," Heisenberg originally formulated his ideas in terms of a relationship between the precision of a measurement and the disturbance it must create. Although this latter relationship is not rigorously proven, it is commonly believed (and taught) as an aspect of the broader uncertainty principle. Here, we experimentally observe a violation of Heisenberg's "measurement-disturbance relationship", using weak measurements to characterize a quantum system before and after it interacts with a measurement apparatus. Our experiment implements a 2010 proposal of Lund and Wiseman to confirm a revised measurement-disturbance relationship derived by Ozawa in 2003. Its results have broad implications for the foundations of quantum mechanics and for practical issues in quantum measurement.
In two articles, the authors claim that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle limits the precision of simultaneous measurements of the position and velocity of a particle and refer to experimental evidence that supports their claim. It is true that ever since the inception of quantum mechanics, the uncertainty relation that corresponds to a pair of observables represented by non-commuting operators is interpreted by many scientists and engineers, including Heisenberg himself, as a limitation on the accuracy with which observables can be measured. However, such a limitation cannot be deduced from the postulates and theorems of quantum thermodynamics.
The word 'uncertainty', in the context of quantum mechanics, usually evokes an impression of an essential unknowability of what might actually be going on at the quantum level of activity, as is made explicit in Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, and in the fact that the theory normally provides only probabilities for the results of quantum measurement. These issues limit our ultimate understanding of the behaviour of things, if we take quantum mechanics to represent an absolute truth. But they do not cause us to put that very 'truth' into question. This article addresses the issue of quantum 'uncertainty' from a different perspective, raising the question of whether this term might be applied to the theory itself, despite its unrefuted huge success over an enormously diverse range of observed phenomena. There are, indeed, seeming internal contradictions in the theory that lead us to infer that a total faith in it at all levels of scale leads us to almost fantastical implications.
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.