6
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 16:
Line 16: + + + +
Talk:Quantum mechanics (view source)
Revision as of 17:50, December 13, 2008
, 17:50, December 13, 2008no edit summary
:Yes, thank you for clarifying the point that the position and momentum of an electron can never both be known with arbitrary precision. This has been poorly stated in many places, and is really misleading. It's hard enough to understand physics; let's not make it any harder. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 20:34, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
:Yes, thank you for clarifying the point that the position and momentum of an electron can never both be known with arbitrary precision. This has been poorly stated in many places, and is really misleading. It's hard enough to understand physics; let's not make it any harder. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 20:34, 19 August 2008 (EDT)
Hi, I'm new here, so I apologize if I'm doing this incorrectly. Should I propose edits on the talk page and then make them on the main page? There are some things stated on this subject on the front page that are incorrect (although not completely wrong), and I would like to correct that. I'm hoping to eventually help out in other subjects here, but for now will contribute to what I know best.
My first edit would be on the uncertainty position - it states that position and velocity can not both be simultaneously known to within arbitrary position. The current statement is about velocity only. For applications of quantum mechanics, I think we should talk about more than just radioactive decay - I would like to add a link on transistors, as they seem a far more relevant application of QM in people's daily lives. Also, radioactive decay is often thrown about in a cartoonish way without fully understanding it - which is why things like carbon dating done by evolutionists are so blindly accepted by the public, when the science to make a real measurement is actually quite complicated.