On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:48:57 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 12:36:07 PM UTC, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 17 Jan 2019, at 09:33, [email protected] wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 3:58:48 AM UTC, Brent wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/16/2019 7:25 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, January 14, 2019 at 6:12:43 AM UTC, Brent wrote: 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 1/13/2019 9:51 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This means, to me, that the arbitrary phase angles have absolutely no 
>>>> effect on the resultant interference pattern which is observed. But isn't 
>>>> this what the phase angles are supposed to effect? AG
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The screen pattern is determined by *relative phase angles for the 
>>>> different paths that reach the same point on the screen*.  The 
>>>> relative angles only depend on different path lengths, so the overall 
>>>> phase 
>>>> angle is irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>> Brent
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Sure, except there areTWO forms of phase interference in Wave 
>>> Mechanics; the one you refer to above, and another discussed in the 
>>> Stackexchange links I previously posted. In the latter case, the wf is 
>>> expressed as a superposition, say of two states, where we consider two 
>>> cases; a multiplicative complex phase shift is included prior to the sum, 
>>> and different complex phase shifts multiplying each component, all of the 
>>> form e^i (theta). Easy to show that interference exists in the latter case, 
>>> but not the former. Now suppose we take the inner product of the wf with 
>>> the ith eigenstate of the superposition, in order to calculate the 
>>> probability of measuring the eigenvalue of the ith eigenstate, applying one 
>>> of the postulates of QM, keeping in mind that each eigenstate is multiplied 
>>> by a DIFFERENT complex phase shift.  If we further assume the eigenstates 
>>> are mutually orthogonal, the probability of measuring each eigenvalue does 
>>> NOT depend on the different phase shifts. What happened to the interference 
>>> demonstrated by the Stackexchange links? TIA, AG *
>>>
>>> Your measurement projected it out. It's like measuring which slit the 
>>> photon goes through...it eliminates the interference.
>>>
>>> Brent
>>>
>>
>> *That's what I suspected; that going to an orthogonal basis, I departed 
>> from the examples in Stackexchange where an arbitrary superposition is used 
>> in the analysis of interference. Nevertheless, isn't it possible to 
>> transform from an arbitrary superposition to one using an orthogonal basis? 
>> And aren't all bases equivalent from a linear algebra pov? If all bases are 
>> equivalent, why would transforming to an orthogonal basis lose 
>> interference, whereas a general superposition does not? TIA, AG*
>>
>>
>> I don’t understand this. All the bases we have used all the time are 
>> supposed to be orthonormal bases. We suppose that the scalar product (e_i 
>> e_j) = delta_i_j, when presenting the Born rule, and the quantum formalism.
>>
>> Bruno
>>
>
> *Generally, bases in a vector space are NOT orthonormal. For example, in 
> the vector space of vectors in the plane, any pair of non-parallel vectors *
>
 
*(excluding anti parallel vectors) form a basis. AG*

*Same for any general superposition of states in QM. HOWEVER, 
> eigenfunctions with distinct eigenvalues ARE orthogonal. I posted a link to 
> this proof a few months ago. IIRC, it was on its specifically named thread. 
> AG*
>

*Posted on July 25, 2018:*
  
Proof; Eigenfunctions having different eigenvalues are orthogonal

AG

>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to