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

MEEF Explanation of Heisenberg Uncertainty and the Energy–Time Relation Reframed

Mohammad Reza Movahed Shariat Panahi

Published Oct 14, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The uncertainty principle is reinterpreted through the confinement picture: measurement is a structural perturbation that alters the local escape factor, and the energy–time uncertainty relation becomes a statement about confinement. This paper derives the Mo-modified uncertainty relations, treats measurement as a perturbation of the confinement state, and reframes the standard uncertainty bounds within the Movahed Energy Escape Factor (MEEF) framework.

DOI
10.5281/zenodo.23353041

Related papers

The Uncertainty Principle, Space-Phase Mesh Response, and the Physical Limits of Atomic Confinement: A Mechanistic Interpretation of Wave Penetration and Energy Containment

James E Beecham

The Heisenberg uncertainty principle has traditionally been interpreted as a mathematicallimitation inherent to quantum systems. While extraordinarily successful as a predictiveformalism, the principle itself does not identify a physical mechanism responsible for theobserved limits on localization, confinement, and energy transfer. The Space-Phase (SP3)model proposes that matter and radiation propagate through a structured, conditionablemedium possessing finite stiffness, coherence, memory, and relaxation properties. Withinthis framework, the uncertainty relationship is reinterpreted as expressing the minimumdegree of irreversible space-phase reorganization required to establish a physically distinctstate. This interpretation naturally links uncertainty, atomic energy confinement,resonance, tunneling, ionization, and the penetration of electromagnetic radiation into aunified description. The discussion further proposes that the ability of electromagneticwaves to enter, remain within, or escape atomic systems depends upon the relationshipbetween wavelength, energy, and the response time of the surrounding space-phase mesh.The resulting picture provides a physically intuitive framework that complementsestablished quantum mechanics while suggesting experimentally testable interpretationsof mesh response across the electromagnetic spectrum.

•Jul 4, 2026•0 citations

Time-energy uncertainty relation for quantum events

Matteo Fadel, Lorenzo Maccone

Textbook quantum mechanics treats time as a classical parameter and not as a quantum observable with an associated Hermitian operator. For this reason, to make sense of usual time-energy uncertainty relations such as $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}t\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}E\ensuremath{\gtrsim}\ensuremath{\hbar}$, the term $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}t$ must be interpreted as a time interval and not as a time measurement uncertainty due to quantum noise. However, quantum clocks allow for a measurement of the ``time at which an event happens'' by conditioning the system's evolution on an additional quantum degree of freedom. Within this framework we derive here two uncertainty relations that relate the uncertainty in the quantum measurement of the time at which a quantum event happens on a system to its energy uncertainty.

arXiv:2108.13974•Physical Review A•Nov 24, 2021•10 citations

On Entropic Uncertainty Relations for Measurements of Energy and Its “Complement”

Alexey E. Rastegin

Abstract Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in application to energy and time is a powerful heuristics. This statement plays an important role in foundations of quantum theory and statistical physics. If some state exists for a finite interval of time, then it cannot have a completely definite value of energy. It is well known that the case of energy and time principally differs from more familiar examples of two non‐commuting observables. Since quantum theory was originated, many approaches to energy–time uncertainties have been proposed. Entropic way to formulate the uncertainty principle is currently the subject of active researches. Using the Pegg concept of complementarity of the Hamiltonian, uncertainty relations of the “energy–time” type are obtained in terms of Rényi and Tsallis entropies. Although this concept is somehow restricted in scope, derived relations can be applied to systems typically used in quantum information processing. Both the state‐dependent and state‐independent formulations are of interest. Some of the derived state‐independent bounds are similar to the results obtained within a more general approach on the basis of sandwiched relative entropies. The developed method allows us to address the case of detection inefficiencies.

arXiv:1807.11413•Annalen der Physik•Feb 10, 2019•9 citations

Uncertainty principle for joint measurement of noncommuting variables

M. G. Raymer

Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle refer to errors of measurement, or to the spread of values of the physical variables intrinsic to a particle’s state, or to some combination of these? The most commonly quoted form of the uncertainty principle relates the spread of an ensemble of separate measurements of some variable to the analogous spread of its conjugate variable. In contrast, Heisenberg’s original argument for the uncertainty principle involved the perturbation to a particle’s state by a measurement of one variable, which affects one’s ability to predict the outcome of a subsequent measurement of the conjugate variable. The relation between these two views of the uncertainty principle is discussed in this paper. A familiar example is considered: an ensemble of identically prepared particles passing through a slit, and after further propagation being detected. From this arrangement it is possible to infer joint (although necessarily imprecise) information on both transverse position and conjugate momentum for each member of the ensemble. It is shown that in this case of joint measurement the product of standard deviations for the measurement outcomes is at least twice as large as the lower bound implied by the usual uncertainty principle. The discussion is meant to help clarify the different roles played in the various statements of the uncertainty principle by the initial state and by measurement error.

American Journal of Physics•Nov 1, 1994•70 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

Flow of time during energy measurements and the resulting time-energy uncertainty relations

Ismael L. Paiva, Augusto César Lobo, Eliahu Cohen

Uncertainty relations play a crucial role in quantum mechanics. Well-defined methods exist for the derivation of such uncertainties for pairs of observables. Other approaches also allow the formulation of time-energy uncertainty relations, even though time is not an operator in standard quantum mechanics. However, in these cases, different approaches are associated with different meanings and interpretations for these relations. The one of interest here revolves around the idea of whether quantum mechanics inherently imposes a fundamental minimum duration for energy measurements with a certain precision. In our study, we investigate within the Page and Wootters timeless framework how energy measurements modify the relative "flow of time'' between internal and external clocks. This provides a unified framework for discussing the subject, allowing us to recover previous results and derive new ones. In particular, we show that the duration of an energy measurement carried out by an external system cannot be performed arbitrarily fast from the perspective of the internal clock. Moreover, we show that during any energy measurement the evolution given by the internal clock is non-unitary.

arXiv:2106.00523•Quantum•Apr 7, 2022•16 citations
The uncertainty principle is reinterpreted through the confinement picture: measurement is a structural perturbation that alters the local escape factor, and the energy–time uncertainty relation becomes a statement about confinement. This paper derives the Mo-modified uncertainty relations, treats measurement as a perturbation of the confinement state, and reframes the standard uncertainty bounds within the Movahed Energy Escape Factor (MEEF) framework.
The Heisenberg uncertainty principle has traditionally been interpreted as a mathematicallimitation inherent to quantum systems. While extraordinarily successful as a predictiveformalism, the principle itself does not identify a physical mechanism responsible for theobserved limits on localization, confinement, and energy transfer. The Space-Phase (SP3)model proposes that matter and radiation propagate through a structured, conditionablemedium possessing finite stiffness, coherence, memory, and relaxation properties. Withinthis framework, the uncertainty relationship is reinterpreted as expressing the minimumdegree of irreversible space-phase reorganization required to establish a physically distinctstate. This interpretation naturally links uncertainty, atomic energy confinement,resonance, tunneling, ionization, and the penetration of electromagnetic radiation into aunified description. The discussion further proposes that the ability of electromagneticwaves to enter, remain within, or escape atomic systems depends upon the relationshipbetween wavelength, energy, and the response time of the surrounding space-phase mesh.The resulting picture provides a physically intuitive framework that complementsestablished quantum mechanics while suggesting experimentally testable interpretationsof mesh response across the electromagnetic spectrum.
Textbook quantum mechanics treats time as a classical parameter and not as a quantum observable with an associated Hermitian operator. For this reason, to make sense of usual time-energy uncertainty relations such as $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}t\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}E\ensuremath{\gtrsim}\ensuremath{\hbar}$, the term $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}t$ must be interpreted as a time interval and not as a time measurement uncertainty due to quantum noise. However, quantum clocks allow for a measurement of the ``time at which an event happens'' by conditioning the system's evolution on an additional quantum degree of freedom. Within this framework we derive here two uncertainty relations that relate the uncertainty in the quantum measurement of the time at which a quantum event happens on a system to its energy uncertainty.
Abstract Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in application to energy and time is a powerful heuristics. This statement plays an important role in foundations of quantum theory and statistical physics. If some state exists for a finite interval of time, then it cannot have a completely definite value of energy. It is well known that the case of energy and time principally differs from more familiar examples of two non‐commuting observables. Since quantum theory was originated, many approaches to energy–time uncertainties have been proposed. Entropic way to formulate the uncertainty principle is currently the subject of active researches. Using the Pegg concept of complementarity of the Hamiltonian, uncertainty relations of the “energy–time” type are obtained in terms of Rényi and Tsallis entropies. Although this concept is somehow restricted in scope, derived relations can be applied to systems typically used in quantum information processing. Both the state‐dependent and state‐independent formulations are of interest. Some of the derived state‐independent bounds are similar to the results obtained within a more general approach on the basis of sandwiched relative entropies. The developed method allows us to address the case of detection inefficiencies.
Does the Heisenberg uncertainty principle refer to errors of measurement, or to the spread of values of the physical variables intrinsic to a particle’s state, or to some combination of these? The most commonly quoted form of the uncertainty principle relates the spread of an ensemble of separate measurements of some variable to the analogous spread of its conjugate variable. In contrast, Heisenberg’s original argument for the uncertainty principle involved the perturbation to a particle’s state by a measurement of one variable, which affects one’s ability to predict the outcome of a subsequent measurement of the conjugate variable. The relation between these two views of the uncertainty principle is discussed in this paper. A familiar example is considered: an ensemble of identically prepared particles passing through a slit, and after further propagation being detected. From this arrangement it is possible to infer joint (although necessarily imprecise) information on both transverse position and conjugate momentum for each member of the ensemble. It is shown that in this case of joint measurement the product of standard deviations for the measurement outcomes is at least twice as large as the lower bound implied by the usual uncertainty principle. The discussion is meant to help clarify the different roles played in the various statements of the uncertainty principle by the initial state and by measurement error.
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.
Uncertainty relations play a crucial role in quantum mechanics. Well-defined methods exist for the derivation of such uncertainties for pairs of observables. Other approaches also allow the formulation of time-energy uncertainty relations, even though time is not an operator in standard quantum mechanics. However, in these cases, different approaches are associated with different meanings and interpretations for these relations. The one of interest here revolves around the idea of whether quantum mechanics inherently imposes a fundamental minimum duration for energy measurements with a certain precision. In our study, we investigate within the Page and Wootters timeless framework how energy measurements modify the relative "flow of time'' between internal and external clocks. This provides a unified framework for discussing the subject, allowing us to recover previous results and derive new ones. In particular, we show that the duration of an energy measurement carried out by an external system cannot be performed arbitrarily fast from the perspective of the internal clock. Moreover, we show that during any energy measurement the evolution given by the internal clock is non-unitary.