In the introductory course of microworld physics and subsequently, in the introduction to quantum physics, students become acquainted with new, more abstract and less intuitive ideas about the microworld. As a result of a different view of measurement and the possibility of measuring physical quantities in the microworld, the definition of the state of the physical system changes. It differs from the definition of the state of the classical system. In classical state, it makes sense to ask about the value of any quantity. With this idea, the student enters the introductory course of quantum theory, where such a question may no longer make sense. In a particular quantum state, a quantum system may not have sharply defined values of all quantities. For a student with standard ideas, this fact can cause problems in understanding quantum theory. Correct classical ideas can thus become a source of incorrect ideas in quantum physics - misconceptions. In this paper, we address some such preconceptions arising from classical physics, which may be potential sources of misconceptions in quantum theory. We deal with the issue of wave-corpuscular dualism and superposition of states. In a sample of 56 students from university of technology in Slovakia, we used a test to determine the occurrence of preconceptions concerning the transition from classical physics to the physics of the microworld. The test consisted of 9 closed questions with the possibility of choosing the correct answer, created using a theoretical example of a double slit experiment. Based on the specific answers of students, we identified misconceptions initially rooted in the standard subject of physics. The students showed misconceptions concerning the different view between the classical and quantum wave, the issue of wave-corpuscular dualism and the principle of superposition. The revealing of these misconceptions and their analysis is beneficial in the future teaching process when the emphasis will be placed in those parts of quantum physics in which the given misconceptions occur and arise.
In the introductory course of microworld physics and subsequently, in the introduction to quantum physics, students become acquainted with new, more abstract and less intuitive ideas about the microworld. As a result of a different view of measurement and the possibility of measuring physical quantities in the microworld, the definition of the state of the physical system changes. It differs from the definition of the state of the classical system. In classical state, it makes sense to ask about the value of any quantity. With this idea, the student enters the introductory course of quantum theory, where such a question may no longer make sense. In a particular quantum state, a quantum system may not have sharply defined values of all quantities. For a student with standard ideas, this fact can cause problems in understanding quantum theory. Correct classical ideas can thus become a source of incorrect ideas in quantum physics - misconceptions. In this paper, we address some such preconceptions arising from classical physics, which may be potential sources of misconceptions in quantum theory. We deal with the issue of wave-corpuscular dualism and superposition of states. In a sample of 56 students from university of technology in Slovakia, we used a test to determine the occurrence of preconceptions concerning the transition from classical physics to the physics of the microworld. The test consisted of 9 closed questions with the possibility of choosing the correct answer, created using a theoretical example of a double slit experiment. Based on the specific answers of students, we identified misconceptions initially rooted in the standard subject of physics. The students showed misconceptions concerning the different view between the classical and quantum wave, the issue of wave-corpuscular dualism and the principle of superposition. The revealing of these misconceptions and their analysis is beneficial in the future teaching process when the emphasis will be placed in those parts of quantum physics in which the given misconceptions occur and arise.
A common learning goal for modern physics instructors is for students to recognize a difference between the experimental uncertainty of classical physics and the fundamental uncertainty of quantum mechanics. Our studies suggest this notoriously difficult task may be frustrated by the intuitively realist perspectives of introductory students, and a lack of ontological flexibility in their conceptions of light and matter. We have developed a framework for understanding and characterizing student perspectives on the physical interpretation of quantum mechanics, and demonstrate the differential impact on student thinking of the myriad ways instructors approach interpretive themes in their introductory courses. Like expert physicists, students interpret quantum phenomena differently, and these interpretations are significantly influenced by their overall stances on questions central to the so-called measurement problem: Is the wave function physically real, or simply a mathematical tool? Is the collapse of the wave function an ad hoc rule, or a physical transition not described by any equation? Does an electron, being a form of matter, exist as a localized particle at all times? These questions, which are of personal and academic interest to our students, are largely only superficially addressed in our introductory courses, often for fear of opening a Pandora's Box of student questions, none of which have easy answers. We show how a transformed modern physics curriculum (recently implemented at the University of Colorado) may positively impact student perspectives on indeterminacy and wave-particle duality, by making questions of classical and quantum reality a central theme of our course, but also by making the beliefs of our students, and not just those of scientists, an explicit topic of discussion.
Through many years of teaching Quantum Mechanics in Algerian universities, we have noticed that students face great obstacles in understanding the meaning of the basic concepts of this theory, such as the Wave Function, the Uncertainly Principle, the Superposition Principle and the Complementarity Principle. We believe that these obstacles rise due to the influence of basic concepts in Classical Mechanics which students studied for many years before studying Quantum Mechanics. For example, in Classical Mechanics, the concept of wave and the concept of corpuscle refer to different things, while in Quantum Mechanics both concepts refer to the same thing, namely a "quantum particle". In order to study the problem, a questionnaire sheet was presented to concerned students third-year (undergraduate physics students) before they studied the subject and after studying it. We note that these third-year students had had, as an introduction, a deep discussion of the meaning of quantum mechanical concepts for about one hour and a half a week during one month. To compare the results and show the importance of the epistemological and educational aspects, we presented again the same questionnaire to fifth-year physics students (B.Sc degree). We mention that the latter learned Quantum Mechanics without an epistemological introduction of the basic quantum mechanical concepts. Before giving our epistemological and didactical analysis of the results, we give a brief review of a previous didactical study related to the subject made by other authors. We conclude by giving some suggestions which we think are necessary in teaching Quantum Mechanics.
New insight on the principles of the quantum physics development is given. The quite different behavior of quantum microworld mechanical systems in comparison with classical mechanical macroworld systems is attributed to the drastical change of the role of the gravitation field on the dynamics of microworld mechanical systems, for which it seems to be vanishing in com- parison with the role of the gravitation field on the dynamics of macroworld mechanical systems, for which it is decisive. The conclusion on the status of the second main postulate of quantum mechanics is given. Its formulation in all textbooks has to be represented in the form of the proved statement, since the hypothesis of Schrödinger on the existence of the field scalar function, being to be observable quantity, just charge density, is strictly mathematically proved. It is shown, that the field scalar function, being to be the solution of the corresponding nonstationary in general case Schrödinger equation and being to be the function the only of coordinates and time, actually describes the state of the atomic system, more strictly its corpuscular aspect. The atomic system is considered from the positions of the field theory, that is, it is the association of elementary particles with corresponding fields. The given fields being to be the media for the particles’ propagation are responsible for the wave aspect in the characteristic of atomic systems. The wave aspect is described by the independent scalar wave-function which was also introduced in quantum physics by Schrödinger, althogh the given fact seems to be unknown to the wide circle of the readers. The second main postulate being to be mathematically strictly grounded in Schrödinger formulation of quantum nechanics, in the popular probabilistic form of quantum nechanics cannot be proved for the general case, although the probabilistic theatise, proposed by Born is true in a number of special cases, quite correctly indicated by Dirac. The possible ways of the development of quantum theory, based on clear understanding of the origin of corpuscular-wave dualism and based on the fundamental both now mathemtically grounded main postulates are analysed.
A common learning goal for modern physics instructors is for students to recognize a difference between the experimental uncertainty of classical physics and the fundamental uncertainty of quantum mechanics. Our studies suggest this notoriously difficult task may be frustrated by the intuitively realist perspectives of introductory students, and a lack of ontological flexibility in their conceptions of light and matter. We have developed a framework for understanding and characterizing student perspectives on the physical interpretation of quantum mechanics, and demonstrate the differential impact on student thinking of the myriad ways instructors approach interpretive themes in their introductory courses. Like expert physicists, students interpret quantum phenomena differently, and these interpretations are significantly influenced by their overall stances on questions central to the so-called measurement problem: Is the wave function physically real, or simply a mathematical tool? Is the collapse of the wave function an ad hoc rule, or a physical transition not described by any equation? Does an electron, being a form of matter, exist as a localized particle at all times? These questions, which are of personal and academic interest to our students, are largely only superficially addressed in our introductory courses, often for fear of opening a Pandora's Box of student questions, none of which have easy answers. We show how a transformed modern physics curriculum (recently implemented at the University of Colorado) may positively impact student perspectives on indeterminacy and wave-particle duality, by making questions of classical and quantum reality a central theme of our course, but also by making the beliefs of our students, and not just those of scientists, an explicit topic of discussion.
Not only is Quantum Mechanics (QM) conceptually rich, it is also a theory that physics students have found abstract and technically formidable. Nevertheless, compared to other classical topics of physics, university students’ understanding of QM has received minimal attention in the physics education literature. The principal purpose of this study was to characterize the variation in the ways that undergraduate physics students depict the basic concepts of QM and to extrapolate the results to scaffold possible changes to instructional practices at the university that provided the context for the study. In so doing, an adaptation of a developmental phenomenographic perspective was chosen. Empirically, the study was approached through in-depth interviews with 35 physics students from two Ethiopian governmental universities after they had been exposed to the traditional QM course for one-third of a semester. Interview responses were analyzed using phenomenographic approach where a picture of students’ depictions was established for each quantum concept by expounding the given responses. For each basic quantum concept addressed, the structure of the description categories was separately constructed, and overall, it was found that naive, quasi-classical ontology and/or variants of classical ways of visualization are dominant in students’ responses. For example, it was found that students’ depictions of the photon concept could be described with three distinct categories of description, which are (a) classical intuitive description, (b) mixed model description and (c) quasi-quantum model description. Similarly, the findings revealed that it is possible to establish three qualitatively different categories of description to picture students’ depictions of matter waves, namely, (a) classical and trajectory-based description, (b) an intricate blend of classical and quantum description and (c) incipient quantum model description. Likewise, it was found that students’ depictions of uncertainty principle can be described as: (a) uncertainty as classical ignorance, (b) uncertainty as measurement disturbance and (c) uncertainty as a quasi-quantum principle. \nWith regard to learning QM, the categories of description made clear several issues: most students did not have enough knowledge to depict the basic concepts of QM properly; they were influenced by the perspective of classical physics and their perceptions in making explanations about QM; and they also applied mixed ideas, one based on their classical model and the other from newly introduced QM. These results are also supported by the findings of previous studies in similar domains. Findings from the study were used to guide the design of multiple representations-based instructions and interactive learning tutorials on the conceptual aspects of QM that has been shown to address specific difficulties identified in the study. Theoretical and practical implications of the study, as well as potential future considerations are drawn.
The measurement problem in quantum mechanics has been a cause of much puzzlement over the years. The very idea of having two different versions of reality for the same system has been a cause for much debate. Often quantum mechanics textbooks follow the ‘shut up and calculate’ paradigm. This denies the opportunity for the common student to understand the consequence of one of the most elegant and beautiful aspects of science. The state of the art textbooks give a purely algebraic, perfunctory and monotonous approach where the real consequence of the system is not fully appreciated. A good reason for this is the considerable deviation of the quantum mechanical process from the commonsensical idea of truth, reality and reason. We tend to look at the world in a materialistic, deterministic, causal and objectivistic way. We tend not to accept a world of contradictions. A quantum measurement is essentially an amalgamation of contradictions, mystery and duality. It encompasses an implicit dependence on subjectivity and contradicts with causality as we know it. We look at the world as in the present. But a quantum mechanical measurement is a prediction of the future influenced by the observer or the measurer. This offers a philosophical and pedagogical conundrum. It poses a challenge on not just how our perception of the world might change in addition to providing a big challenge on how to make it compatible with the other successful theories of physics. The most common text book interpretation of quantum mechanics has been the Copenhagen Interpretation suggests the ‘collapse of the wave function’ as a mechanism of transition between duality. But a more bizarre yet elegant theory, extending quantum formalism to the classical domain, called the Many Worlds Interpretation has been catching up very quickly; it stands for the split of the universe when we make a quantum mechanical measurement. Consequently, reality as we is redefined as a universal wave function which is a superposition of several outcomes, which is incompatible with many of the successful concepts of physics and has several problems like the correct idea about probability or basis. We adapt the idea of the universal wave function, but instead suggest a continuum interpretation of quantum mechanics where the universal wave function represents the entire singular universe and the concept of atoms or electrons as conceptually a continuous part of it rather than a distinct separate entity. Such an interpretation could be compatible with other continuum theories like the Superfluid vacuum theory or the Higgs Field.