This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
The images are mis-positioned. The image of quantum tunneling is out of place here.
I will make some edits to fix what I see is broken. I'll live this for discussion. Johnjbarton ( talk) 03:35, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Very limited references makes verifying the content of this page very difficult.
In the section Wave_packet#Gaussian_wave_packets_in_quantum_mechanics the content around "wave-packet spreading" cites Darwin, Charles Galton. "Free motion in the wave mechanics." Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character 117.776 (1927): 258-293.
That article is available https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspa.1927.0179?download=true
However the article does discussed the spread of a moving Gaussian wave packet, not a stationary one. See equation 4.5. The content in the page is therefore a derived result, not encyclopedic. I believe the content is physically correct, but we have no independent way to know. Johnjbarton ( talk) 18:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
The current article says:
Quantum mechanics ascribes a special significance to the wave packet; In the Copenhagen interpretation, it is interpreted as a probability amplitude, its norm squared describing the probability density that a particle or particles in a particular state will be measured to have a given position or momentum.
This statement is unreferenced and incorrect. The sentence is mostly correct for a "wave function" not at all correct for a "wave packet". A wave packet is a multiple wave construct. It's interpretation is entire orthogonal to that construction. Johnjbarton ( talk) 01:37, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
This article incorrectly equates "wave packet" with wave particle duality. The history section is especially egregious. It does not have a single reference about the history of wave packets. Johnjbarton ( talk) 02:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
100 117.18.228.234 ( talk) 16:04, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
The images are mis-positioned. The image of quantum tunneling is out of place here.
I will make some edits to fix what I see is broken. I'll live this for discussion. Johnjbarton ( talk) 03:35, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Very limited references makes verifying the content of this page very difficult.
In the section Wave_packet#Gaussian_wave_packets_in_quantum_mechanics the content around "wave-packet spreading" cites Darwin, Charles Galton. "Free motion in the wave mechanics." Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character 117.776 (1927): 258-293.
That article is available https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspa.1927.0179?download=true
However the article does discussed the spread of a moving Gaussian wave packet, not a stationary one. See equation 4.5. The content in the page is therefore a derived result, not encyclopedic. I believe the content is physically correct, but we have no independent way to know. Johnjbarton ( talk) 18:17, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
The current article says:
Quantum mechanics ascribes a special significance to the wave packet; In the Copenhagen interpretation, it is interpreted as a probability amplitude, its norm squared describing the probability density that a particle or particles in a particular state will be measured to have a given position or momentum.
This statement is unreferenced and incorrect. The sentence is mostly correct for a "wave function" not at all correct for a "wave packet". A wave packet is a multiple wave construct. It's interpretation is entire orthogonal to that construction. Johnjbarton ( talk) 01:37, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
This article incorrectly equates "wave packet" with wave particle duality. The history section is especially egregious. It does not have a single reference about the history of wave packets. Johnjbarton ( talk) 02:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
100 117.18.228.234 ( talk) 16:04, 16 December 2023 (UTC)